Cardinals-Panthers, The Delicious Sloppy Joe of the NFL Playoffs

by Deghasio

On Saturday afternoon, the 11-5 Arizona Cardinals will travel to Carolina to play the 7-8-1 Carolina Panthers. Just in terms of records, this is unusual.  The Panthers ended a game this year with a draw, an occurrence so rare that you can count the number of tie games this millennium on one hand. (Ultimately the tie did not effect whether or not the Panthers made the playoffs; even if Bengals kicker Mike Nugent made a week 6 36-yarder the Panthers still would have made the playoffs because they have a better division record than the Saints.) Furthermore, sub-.500 teams rarely have the opportunity to host games in January. The last instance was in the 2010 season when the defending Super Bowl champion New Orleans Saints lost 41-36 to the 7-9 Seattle Seahawks despite being double-digit favorites, a game punctuated by the famous Beast Quake.

NFL MVP Race

At the end of the NFL regular season, the MVP race has boiled down to two men.  One is Green Bay's quarterback Aaron Rodgers who is lighting up opposing defenses while throwing more touchdowns than any QB other than five time MVP Peyton Manning and up and coming superstar Andrew Luck. Moreover, Rodgers has led the Packers to their fourth consecutive NFC North title, which he clinched after returning to the game with a calf injury.  Upon his return he continued to be a grittily effective passer, and scored a rushing touchdown off of a QB-sneak to lead the team to a 30-20 victory over the Detroit Lions.

Everyone watching that game understood how amazing a performance Rodgers was putting up.  In addition to being at the top of the pack for all QB stats, Rodgers also is at his best when injured, or throwing off of his back foot, or scrambling away from defensive penetration.  However, we have all been conditioned to recognize offensive ball-handlers levels of success, while we still have trouble noticing a dominant performance on the defensive side of the ball.

That fact is what makes the other MVP frontrunner such an amazing player.  J.J. Watt of the Houston Texans is a walking highlight reel.  He is anticipated to be the first defensive player since 2008 to even receive a single vote in the AP poll (which is used to pick the MVP) and judging by the videos of his "awkward TD celebration" and the reports that all he does is live and breathe football it is not his charisma winning him votes.  Instead, it is just the formal recognition of a football machine doing its job better than any football machine has been designed to perform.  Some of his stats on their own are not unimaginable, but it is the combination of 20.5 sacks, 59 tackles, an interception, four forced fumbles, 5 fumbles returns, a safety, and to top it off he caught 3/3 passes for 3 offensive touchdowns.  In short, J.J. Watt is a walking destroyer of Quarterbacks who dream of standing up long enough to throw a football, and we are all realizing that enough to at least have some people vote for him.  However, since only two defensive players have ever won the MVP award, all of the semi-related reasons to fault Watt begin to gain even more relative importance.

The largest difference between Rodgers and Watt which is directly comparable is the success of their teams.  The Packers as I've pointed out have won their division for the fourth year in a row.  The Texans failed to make the playoffs, but they also improved their record by seven wins, the most by any team in the league.  That improvement did come in the AFC South, by far the weakest division in the NFL this season, but it was also due in large part to Watt.

Overall, the difficulty in comparing these two players is immense.  Also, both players have had MVP-worthy seasons.  If this were just a case of an above average QB winning the award because we value offense higher, then I would hope for Watt to win, but it is instead a situation where both of them have carried there teams to wins, and both of them pass the "do I think Holy *&(# regularly when I watch them play" test, which to me is the most important.  So now all there is to do is wait for the votes to come in.

The Important Part:
Aaron Rodgers's Sandwich:  A Cheeseburger made with a lot of Wisconsin cheddar cheese, because he is the kind of player who can satisfy all your NFL watching hunger for a day, and you don't need to be from Green Bay to appreciate his play.

J.J. Watt's Sandwich: J.J. Watt is the record breaking Sarnie, because like Watt it is chock-ful-a protein, took a long time and a lot of hard work to create, and probably isn't going to receive the recognition that he truly deserves.

The Curse of David Akers Continues to Haunt the Eagles

by Deghasio

Sports curses are stupid. Just check out the Wikipedia page for “Sports-related curses.” The majority of them are ridiculous, recent, have a small sample size, or have already been broken multiple times. Take the Curse of the Bambino—for 86 years it was probably the most famous sports curse in America, then the Red Sox won and no one really mentions it anymore. Sports curses don’t exist.

Except the Curse of David Akers.

On Saturday, the Eagles were eliminated from the wild card race after a 27-24 loss to Washington, and barring a complete Dallas collapse the Eagles will be on vacation once the regular season ends. There is a lot of speculation as to why the Eagles lost to Washington: Sanchez’s interception inside the two-minute warning, kicker Cody Parkey’s seemingly-benign groin injury, Sanchez’s fumble early in the game, poor coaching that led to 13 penalties, the inevitable DeSean Jackson revenge game, and corner Bradley Fletcher’s performance that led to his benching. These are all good theories based on research and observation and facts. They’re also all wrong.

Watching The NFL: Why Does it make Me Sick to My Stomach?

Sports are supposed to take our mind off of things. The whole reason we watch them is so that we can eat pizza with our buddies and forget the fact that we have work in the morning, or that we haven't taken out the trash, or whatever tedious part of our day to day life that is looming over us. However, inevitably, real life intrudes. Sometimes that can be a powerful thing, with sports being a historical arena where all races could be placed on an equal footing. Jackie Robinson helped to break down barriers and the Dodgers team ultimately helped with that, although somewhat reluctantly.  This happened again this year with the NBA, when Donald Sterling was stripped of his ownership of the LA Clippers by NBA Commissioner Adam Silver after highly publicized racist remarks.  Despite the fact that Silver said (in a GQ man of the year interview) that the NBA's response might have been different had Sterling's remarks been less well publicized or if they had been directed at a minority group which was less well represented within the NBA, it was still a positive action. 

Unfortunately, this year in sports, many such interactions have been negative, and the NFL (the US's biggest pro sports league) has been the biggest problem. This manifested itself with the pro team from Washington D.C. which still insists on standing by its team name (citing loyalty to the fans) despite the fact that the name inherently alienates a significant portion of the US population.  However, this problem is one of stagnation which over time, and combined with the protests coming from both public figures and the population at large, this issue will be resolved as soon as Dan Snyder (the owner) realizes that his stubbornness is cruel and that it benefits no one.  More terrifying, is the NFL the institution, specifically its handling of women’s issues. 

Recently, my fantasy football league’s message thread blew up with the news that Ray Rice had been reinstated.  We were all unsurprised, because this sort of thing has been happening all year.  As one person said, “Ladies and Gentlemen, the 2014 NFL….Actually, make that just Gentlemen.”  At a time when women make up more than 45% percent of the NFL’s fan base, the League is doing a terrible job at even pretending to value women’s issues.  Three weeks after the NFL handed down Ray Rice’s two-week suspension (with full knowledge of the horrifying video that led to increased public outrage), the NFL suspended Orlando Scandrick for a full month.  What did he do?  He tested positive for MDMA, a party drug.  The NFL is fully invested in defending the moral character of the league, but they see drugs as more of a problem than cold-clocking one’s wife on an elevator and then dragging her down the hallway. 

This disconnect makes it difficult to watch sports.  You want to be able to watch the St. Louis Cardinals play their playoff game, but you see parts of their fan base display an insensitive, and at times incredibly racist response to the events in Ferguson, chanting things like “Let’s go Darren!” back at demonstrators.  You want to support a team, but if its name is a racial slur, how can you?  The good news now is that Ray Rice was dropped from the Ravens roster after the video surfaced, and it is hard to imagine any team picking him up this late in the season.  However, in this instance the damage is done.  The NFL was tested on its humanity, and it gave Rice a slap on the wrist until public opinion swayed further against him.  The NFL is hard to watch this year, and that is the opposite of what sports should be. 

The Sandwich:  A peanut butter and pickle sandwich, which I recently discovered is a real thing.  It works well with these issues, because it tastes bad at first, but then begins to work itself out.  Similarly, these issues will only get better with time, as already people are striving to improve them.

Harrison and Dhario Get a Little Help from Their Friends [Podcast]

Dhario and Harrison reveal their fantasy football team names, analyze Federer's injury, and discuss how to maximize sandwich making in a cafeteria. All the usual segments--plus some special bits (including a weather forecast!) from some longtime listeners.

Try to Remember Nikolay Davydenko

By Deghasio

It’s easy to forget Nikolay Davydenko. The Russian, who retired last month, had a career high ranking of number 3, never reached a grand slam final, never beat the best players when it mattered. He didn’t had a signature shot, like Hewitt’s lob or Nalbandian’s backhand, and he lacked the fiery personality—and domestic popularity—of compatriots Marat Safin, Mikhail Youzhny, and even Dmitry Tursunov. Pretty much the only thing he was famous for was being involved in a year-long betting scandal. (He was ultimately exonerated.)

The defining statistic of Davdenko’s career is that he’s a combined 3-24 against Federer and Roddick, including an 0-16 combined start to these “rivalries.” Classic Kolya. He was always, at best, the third best player on tour. At 5’10, 150 lbs., he lacked the firepower to beat the two hall-of-famers at their peak. When he was playing his best, the other nine players in the top 10 probably could beat him if they were playing their best too.

And yet, some facts are undeniable. He was the most consistent player on the tour (non-Federer, non-Nadal division), becoming the first Russian ever to finish in the year-end top 5 five straight years in a row, something Roddick can’t say. He’s the only person, ever, to have a winning record against Nadal (minimum five matches)…albeit with a dominant record of 6-5. And every once in a while he would catch fire, his opponents would be just a step slow, and he could roll of a stretch of victories. That’s what happened when he won his then-biggest tournament in 2008 in Miami, leading one overzealous writer to proclaim: "Who would have thought that tennis could be rescued by Nikolay Davydenko?" (No, really—that was an actual headline.)

It happened again 18 months later, when he won the 2009 Year End Championships. The other players in the tournament? Oh, just some nobodies: Federer, Nadal, Djokovic, Murray, del Potro, Fernando Verdasco, and Robin Soderling. Every player, except Verdasco and newly minted US Open champ del Potro, would eventually reach multiple grand slam finals. And Davydenko, despite being placed in the group of death, beat Federer for the first time en route to the biggest win of his career over del Potro. He was the perfect version of David Ferrer, running around, getting back every ball, and using whatever small opening his opponent gave him to seize the advantage.

Although this was the biggest tournament for Davydenko, it won’t be the one that defines him for me. That would be the 2010 Australian Open. He entered the tournament on a—well, not a winning streak, but a winning patch against Federer, having beating him in the ’09 Finals and a warm-up tournament in Doha. The hottest player on tour (though maybe not in looks), then got bagelled by Federer in a four-set quarterfinal*. Kolya wouldn't beat Federer for the rest of his career.

*If you don’t click on any links in this article, at least click on the Steve Tignor recap of Davydenko’s ’10 Australian Open in the above paragraph. Also the picture of Davydenko.

So what sandwich is Nikolay Davydenko? I eventually settled on a PB&J. Not the most glamorous sandwich, but one you need to have. There will always be players like Davydenko on the tour. I’ve already mentioned one in Ferrer, but there are scores of them throughout history. Davydenko played the foil to Federer and Roddick and even to Nadal throughout his career. Every time one of the top players played a classic final, Davydenko was in the shadows. He never played The Match against them; he was the guy the top players battled before the match that really mattered. You’re probably not going to remember a PB&J very long, but it was still pretty good when you ate it. That, in two words, is Davydenko’s career: Pretty good.

Mark Sanchez Likes Philly Sandwiches, and Other Sandwich and Sports Topics [Podcast]

Dhario and Harrison, along with a special correspondent, break down the latest in the NBA, NFL, German sandwiches, and chess--that, plus of course listener questions about sandwiches.

The Great Sandwich Episode [Podcast]

Ever wondered the proper etiquette for dealing with end pieces in a loaf of bread? Want to know the etymology of hoagie? Dhario and Harrison answer these questions, and many more, on this week's podcast!

Drinking Games and Power Rankings [Podcast]

For those of you who do not know, Harrison and I do a weekly radio show (Wednesdays 7-8 PM at radiofords.com/listen). We'll try to upload them in podcast form weekly to this site, as well as a transcript of some of our juicier material. The podcast usually consists of a recap and analysis of the major sports, as well as a few more obscure ones. For details on this week's see the end of this post.

Drinking Game

Harrison's weekly off-the-cuff drinking game should be played to Game 1 of the Royals-Orioles series (Friday at 8:00 PM). Drink every time:

    1.    Someone sings (e.g. National Anthem, “Take Me Out to the Ball Game”)

    2.    Cameras Zoom in on an Orioles’ fan wearing a funky orange costume

    3.    Cameras Zoom in on a Royals’ fan wearing a funky blue costume

    4.    Foul ball caught in the stands*

    5.    You misunderstand the rules of baseball

    6.    The announcers reference some complex baseball strategy you don’t understand

    7.    Scoring opportunity that is not capitalized upon

    8.    The team you arbitrarily pick to root for loses = finish drink

*You should do this for every baseball game at every level, not just for this Weekly Drinking Game

Power Ranking

Harrison spouted off his top 10 favorite breads with no previous knowledge that he would do this. The sure-to-engender controversy ranking:

10. Bunny Bread

9. Whole Wheat with way too many seeds in it

8. Dinner Rolls

7. Marble Rye

6. White Bread (regular)

5. Bread Bowls

4. Whole Wheat with a normal number of seeds in it

3. Honey Wheat

2. Sourdough

1. Pumpernickel

Podcast

This week we sorted the contenders from the pretenders in the NFL, bet the farm on a squash tournament, recapped some cricket, complained about Percy Harvin's lack of fantasy impact, and put Harrison on the spot a few times. Check it out!

Jay Gruden Runs a Crappy Diner

Read this while eating: A ham and cheese sans cheese. (See below)

“Zero faith in Jay Gruden to even tie his shoelaces.” – Washington fan Josh L.

Imagine walking into your local sandwich restaurant and having the following interaction with your waiter, played here by Washington football coach Jay Gruden:

You: What sandwiches are good today?

Jay Gruden: Grilled cheese is always a great choice, in my opinion.

You: What kind of cheeses do you have?

JG: Actually, I think we just ran out of cheese.

You: You’re a sandwich store and you ran out of every type of cheese?

JG: Unfortunately, but don’t worry, we have tons of great sandwiches. Do you want a ham and cheese?

You: Sur—wait, didn’t you just say you were out of cheeses?

JG: Oh, yeah, good point, I forgot. How about a tuna sandwich?

You: Get me anything at this point.

JG: Would you like to upgrade to a tuna melt for an extra dollar?

You: [Tries very hard not to punch him while exiting premises]

Jay Gruden made a pretty confusing series of decisions against the Seahawks on Monday Night Football this week, which for the purpose of hyperbole I am going to call the single most frustrating and mind-numbingly idiotic set of coaching decisions in my entire blogging career!!!!!! At the beginning of the third quarter, Washington, down 17-7 to the defending Super Bowl Champion Seattle Supersonics, faced 3^rd & 1 on the Seahawks’ 9. Kirk Cousins barely got the snap off on time en route to trying a quarterback sneak that got stuffed for no gain. This was a pretty tame play call, but one that might have worked if Cousins had had a little more time to set up and pick his hole. (Whatever miscommunication occurred on the field is most likely not attributable to Gurden). Down ten points and needing three measly feet to get a fresh set of downs, Jay “Don’t Call Me Jon” Gruden elected to kick a field goal, thus going down 17-10.

This decision is not that controversial, or at least not as controversial as it should be. With few exceptions, coaches go with the safer of two options. Calling the game, Gruden’s brother lauded the move, noting that baby bro had taken the safe bet to keep the score within two possessions. (Interestingly, Jon “I Won a Super Bowl So Who Cares If You’re Mom’s Favorite” Gruden said he would think about going for it before his brother sent out the field goal unit.) It’s not productive to criticize statements made by conservative broadcasters in the heat of the moment…but it is a lot of fun so here goes: The pro-kicking argument based on keeping the game within two touchdowns is banal for two reasons. First, it was Washington’s first possession of the third quarter. There’s no reason to play the score this early in the game. Going down 17-10 is not much better than going down 17-7, as the Seahawks only needed a field goal (or a safety) to stretch that lead to three possessions—and they had 25 minutes of game time to do that. Second, kicking essentially tells your defense: “Go win this game for us.” Washington obviously needed to score a touchdown in order to tie the game, but they also needed to stop the Seahawks immediately after this field goal in order to have the opportunity to tie the game. Oh yeah, and also stop them every other time Seattle had the ball with a 7-point lead. Considering Washington’s best defense was the Seahawks committing penalties (including 3 TDs nullified in the game), I don’t feel great about the chances of this happening.

Jay Gruden absolutely should have gone for it. Generally, underdogs should play aggressively and favorites should play conservatively. (This is all relative.) When your team isn’t as good, you need to make the game higher-variance in order to win the game. Going for the first down—which, once again, was only one yard away, Cousins and co. didn’t exactly need to cross the Red Sea to pick it up—is a high-risk, high-reward strategy. Scratch that: it’s a moderate-risk, high-reward strategy that could have potentially brought the underdog to within a field goal. Still, playing it safe is what coaches do. They have a system, and they stick to it.

… Which makes Gruden’s next decision so perplexing. Down 17-10, having just pussyfooted around in the red zone, he has kicker Kai Forbath try an onside kick. This needs to be repeated: Gruden declined to try a 4^th & 1 from Seattle’s 9 only to try an onside kick on the very next play. This needs to be repeated a third time: Gruden didn’t want to pick up a yard deep in Seattle territory, then went for a freaking onside kick 30 seconds later.

Let’s do some really simple math together. If Washington had gone for it in the red zone and succeeded, they’re looking at three or four chances to score 7, and even if they don’t get a TD they can fall back on the field goal. If they go for it and fail, then they get no points but at least Seattle has to drive 90 yards to get a touchdown. Which they’re capable of doing, but they can do that whether you give them ball on downs or on the kickoff. And yeah, Washington’s offense isn’t great, but then again they only need one stinking yard, and Cousins and Morris can always fall back on the read-option. With the onside kick: if Washington recovers, they have to drive about 45 yards to get a touchdown. Not a sure thing, especially considering Seattle’s fearsome defense, but definitely possible. If Washington doesn’t recover, then you give Russell Wilson a short field to work with. Now, kicking onside isn’t a bad idea in a vacuum. Like I said, higher variance plays are a great idea for an underdog. But, and this next part is going to get its own paragraph:

Why the f*** would you not be aggressive in the red zone then immediately try an onside kick??!?!?!

Compounding the mistake is that Washington had been kicking short all game in an effort to keep the ball out of Percy Harvin’s hands. Usually when an onside kick succeeds, it’s because the returning team assumes a kick to the end zone. In this scenario it was just the opposite. To summarize: Gruden went super-conservative when being aggressive was easy, then decided to be super-aggressive when aggression was hard.

No, Gruden, I do not want any cheese on my tuna. I just want to pretend like it’s 2012 and Kyle Shanahan is calling plays.