Luck of the Draw

Which is more important in fantasy sports: skill or luck?

Well, it depends who you ask.

I've noticed that people who typically succeed in fantasy sports tend to think it's a matter of skill -- a blend of preparation, knowledge, and experience.

Then there are the people who typically struggle. They constantly complain about their "bad luck," claiming that despite their best efforts, they continually lose.

Of course, there are also winners who swear they "got lucky," and losers who have come to realize that they're forever doomed.

But before explaining my theory, let me use an analogy -- and then an example -- that may make my theory concerning this debate of skill versus luck easier to understand...

Exhibit A: Fantasy sports are like the stock market.

The idea is to carefully select which player (company) you'd like to invest in, based on how he's performed in the past and how he's projected to perform in the future.

From there, your job is to closely monitor your player (stock), making a decision on whether he (or it, the stock) is worth holding.

If you think a player (stock) is living up to or exceeding his potential, you ride him out. If not, you have the option to cut (or sell) him.




Exhibit B: Phil Ivey, the man widely regarded as the world's greatest poker player.

Though Ivey advanced to the final table of the 2009 World Series of Poker, he barely finished in the Top 10 because of a long run of "bad" hands down the stretch.

Despite being the most experienced, successful player at the final table, Ivey couldn't get the job done, proving that sometimes it doesn't matter how prepared you may be or how much skill you may possess.

Which leads me to my opinion on this endless debate...

In fantasy sports you can set yourself up for success by analyzing statistics, studying trends, and being prepared for every possible scenario on draft day and beyond.

This preparation is invaluable -- because you can't gauge its value.

The fact is, good or bad fortune is uncontrollable.

Sure, preparation could work wonders for your fantasy squad. But it could also go to waste if your top pick is a bust, your star running back gets injured, or your team allows a ton of points, something for which you have no control over.

On the other hand, an unprepared fantasy owner can get lucky with a few questionable draft picks, never have to deal with an injury, or rarely allow a ton of points. And trust me, I've seen that before.

So while skill -- preparation, knowledge, and experience -- can improve one's chances, good or bad fortune will always override it.

Born to Run

From 1951 to 1978, Wayne Woodrow "Woody" Hayes led the Ohio State University football program to 205 wins, 13 Big Ten championships, and 3 national titles. He did this by running the football, and running it well.

Hayes' conservative, run-heavy offense inspired sportswriters to coin the phrase "three yards and a cloud of dust." And up until the mid-to-late 90's, this motto accurately characterized the offensive theory of the entire Big Ten.

But today Big Ten offenses are far more balanced. Most programs use three-, four-, and five-receiver sets, and very few utilize the fullback position, the focal point of most Hayes-led offenses.

This season, four of eleven Big Ten offenses can be classified as run-first units. But of those four, three do it from some variation of the lauded "spread," signifying a drastic change in offensive philosophy from the days of double tights and I-formations.

Though Hayes probably wouldn't recognize today's Big Ten, he would have appreciated how this year's de facto Big Ten Championship Game played out. And not just because Ohio State won.




The Buckeyes' thrilling victory was highlighted by their physicality, rushing for 229 yards (4.5 ypc) and 3 touchdowns on offense, while holding the Hawkeyes to just 67 yards (2.8 ypc) of their own.

Ohio State's win clinched at least a share of the Big Ten title for the fifth consecutive season, in addition to the conference's coveted Rose Bowl berth.

This will be Ohio State's first appearance in Pasdena since the 1996 season, and their fifth straight title is the now tied for the second-longest streak in conference history.

Looking at statistics alone, the Buckeyes appeared to have dominated Iowa. They had more first downs, converted on a higher percentage of third downs, and didn't commit one turnover.

If it wasn't for Iowa's effective passing attack, it's unlikely that the game would have gone to overtime, and Ohio State probably would have won by more than three points.

But although the pass may have kept Iowa in the game, they paid dearly for their reliance on the pass in the end.

Stepping in for injured starter Ricky Stanzi, redshirt freshman James Vandenberg was stellar in his first career start -- minus three untimely interceptions, one of which came on Iowa's only possession of overtime.

Woody Hayes never liked to pass the football, claiming that it was too risky to put the ball in the air.

He once said, referring to his team's performance in a season-opening game, "That was as bad an opener as we have ever played. When you get into the passing game, you can expect that sort of thing to happen."

On Saturday, with the Big Ten title and Rose Bowl berth on the line, that sort of thing happened to Iowa.

Old Faithful

I didn't publish a single post in October. But I was writing. I promise.

It's just, every time I was thisclose to completing whatever it was I was working on, something unanticipated would compromise the direction of my story.

Jrue Holiday, the "future" of the Philadelphia 76ers backcourt, was the subject of one such story -- until he struggled to get on the floor this preseason. Today, eight games into the Sixers regular season, Holiday is last on the team in minutes played.

A few weeks ago I started another about the Phillies big-name pitching acquisitions. And I was really looking forward to it. But as you could imagine, the last few nights of the World Series took the wind out of my sails.

The Denver Broncos hot start was the focus of yet another fine piece of work by yours truly. I had planned on writing about how Josh McDaniels' resolve has led the Broncos to an undefeated start. Then they lost two straight.

So instead I'm writing about a guy who's never changed, about a guy who's been as reliable for a story over the last eighteen years as he's been for a start.




His name is Brett Favre. And on the first day of November, Ol' Brett reminded us why he's one of the most revered figures in professional sports.

Playing against the team that he called his own for nearly two decades, in the stadium in which he set countless NFL records, Brett led the Minnesota Vikings to a huge road win over the rival Packers.

In a game filled with both storylines and emotion, Number Four stole the show by passing for four touchdowns and leading the Vikings to a 12-point win in his first and only career game on the opposing sideline of Lambeau.

It was an emphatic performance from Favre: 17 of 28 for 244 yards, 4 touchdowns (to four different players), and 0 interceptions.

His last two touchdowns, each coming in the fourth quarter, extended the Vikings' lead from single-digits to double-digits, the latter being the straw that broke the camel's back.

With that win the first-place Vikes moved 2.5 games ahead of the second-place Pack in the NFC North. And after a bye in Week Nine, coupled with a Packer upset in Tampa, the Vikings now find themselves three games ahead in the Black and Blue.

But years from now, statistics won't be the only thing I'll remember about this game.




I'll remember Brett's child-like enthusiasm when his team scored -- jumping up and down, arms raised, more excited than anyone in the stadium.

I'll remember the compassion he showed when one of his former receivers, Greg Jennings, appeared to be injured near the Viking sideline -- how he took a knee next to Jennings, made sure he was okay, and as Jennings walked away, said something to him that triggered a smile.

I'll remember his clutch play when the game was tight -- highlighted by those two fourth quarter touchdowns to Jeff Dugan and Bernard Berrian.

These are the moments that move people. These are the moments that have made Brett Favre who he is, that have transformed him from small-town Mississippi boy to NFL icon.

Favre plays and speaks from the heart. And that's what Americans like to see. They want an athlete they can relate to, an athlete that can relate to them.

With Brett Favre, you know what you're going to get. I wouldn't dare call him predictable -- but he is reliable. And I mean that in more ways than one.

To Have and Have Not

The upper subdivision of Division 1 college football is made up of one hundred and twenty schools. This leaves a handful of topics up for debate each season.

Some of these debates include: which team is No. 1, who deserves the coveted Heisman Trophy, and in recent years, which conference is supreme.

However, none of these stir people up like the debate over the postseason. From Seattle to South Beach, no conversation is more prevalent. And considering how restless people have become, no conversation is more pertinent.

Will D1-A ever do away with the BCS rankings and the outdated bowl lineup that accompanies them? Will it ever concede that the current system is flawed and give equal opportunity to all of its participants? My prediction: not anytime soon.

But if the bowl subdivision isn't willing to revamp its postseason format and install a playoff of some sort, it has a big problem on its hands: the Top 25 polls.




The Associated Press and USA Today Coaches ballots would be useful if there were a playoff system in place, as they could be a guide for seeding teams when it came time for the tournament -- you know, like Division 1 college basketball.

But without a playoff, these controversial rankings hurt the game, dictating the destiny of each postseason-eligible program. And despite the fact that they're nothing but opinion, the polls greatly influence public perception -- which is often skewed.

It all starts with the preseason polls. These early rankings are a barometer, a starting point. They give us an idea of who stands where. But undoubtedly, many teams are significantly over- or undervalued to begin each season.

This inaccuracy is then carried on throughout the year. And when certain teams start to surprise pollsters on the field, whether good or bad, voters scramble to adjust their rankings accordingly.

For instance, the Washington Huskies were ranked right around No. 85 to begin the season. But after defeating No. 3 Southern Cal just two weeks later, the Associated Press moved Washington into their Top 25. That was, of course, until Washington was knocked off by unranked Stanford the following week.

Where does a team like Washington belong? They beat a top-3 team one week, but then lost to an average (or so we think) Standford club a week later. How can someone possibly determine where to rank the Huskies?

Imagine if Washington defeated No. 3 Southern Cal in the final weekend of the regular season, as opposed to the third weekend in September. They would be rewarded -- because of their big win at season's end -- by playing in a respectable bowl game with a lucrative payout.

On the other hand, if their season ended following the Stanford loss, Washington would be playing in a no-name bowl, earning much less revenue for their school. This is yet another example of how the what-have-you-done-for-me-lately? polls are imperfect.

Why does it matter when a team loses? And why does it matter who beat them? If there were a playoff, there would be no need to debate whose losses were "better." Nor would there be a need to fight over strength of schedule.

Sure, there would be a few bubble teams during the selection process, as there are in basketball. But if there were a 16- or 32-team playoff, would those that fall in that bubble range even have a legitimate argument? If your favorite team is ranked outside the top-16 in the preseason polls, is "championship or bust" your war cry?

At times I've considered how things would go if the initial AP and Coaches polls were released a few weeks into the season. But there are problems with that scenario as well.

Certain teams would then be elevated -- just as they are in the preseason polls today -- because of their program's history or conference affiliation.

Plus, nearly every top-line team plays a few scrubs to start the season, meaning that voters would then have to decide whose wins were more impressive. And that would be counter-productive.

What would be productive, though, would be to institute a playoff.

Sure, I'd like to see a more accurate method for ranking teams -- but if the Football Bowl Subdivision would abandon the current postseason format and devise a playoff, the polls wouldn't be so controversial.

School presidents and conference commissioners could kill two birds with one stone: equal rights for every FBS program, as well as rankings that would guide -- not decide -- postseason destinies.

Why pass up an opportunity to perfect America's greatest sport?

Young, Black, Rich and Angry

Floyd Mayweather, Jr. is one of the most dominant athletes in the history of sports.

When he announced his "retirement" in June of last year, he was walking away from the ring undefeated, widely regarded as the No. 1 pound-for-pound fighter in the world.

Today, nearly two years since his last fight, Mayweather is on his way back to the ring. But considering that we're less than 36 hours away from his return to boxing, wouldn't one expect this to the be the story right now?

Instead, the only news coming out of the Mayweather camp -- as far as the everyday sports fan can tell -- is negative.

"Money" Mayweather is struggling financially. He's also the focal point of an ongoing investigation concerning a shooting. And in recent days, he's made news by sharing his thoughts on why he's so underappreciated, namely because of the complexion of his skin.

"If Floyd Mayweather was white, I'd be the biggest athlete in America. The biggest, the biggest. I know that for a fact," said Mayweather, speaking in the third person Tuesday at a meeting with reporters.

I'm not sure what proof he has to back that up, but it is an interesting thought. On the surface, it does make you wonder why the guy isn't embraced in America: Pretty Boy Mayweather is talented, good-looking, and at the forefront of his sport.

In America that combination (a la Tiger Woods) typically leads to marketability, fame, and sustained wealth. But Mayweather has struggled in each of those respects.

Very few athletes have had as much success as the undefeated -- and now unretired -- former champion. But of those that have, none have had such a difficult time growing their fanbase.

In fact, many spectators -- from diehards to the casual fan -- root against the six-time world champion.

For scores of people, Mayweather's demise is part of the attraction. Oscar De La Hoya, one of boxing's legends in his own right, believes this to be true.

"Millions watch because they can't wait to see him lose," said De La Hoya, one of the promoters for Saturday's 144-pound bout between Mayweather and Juan Manuel Marquez.

Mayweather thinks this is because he's African-American. He's wrong.

It's not about race. It's about persona.

While race relations in America remain a global embarrassment for our nation, Floyd Mayweather is disliked, sometimes even hated, for other reasons.

The average middle-class American, those who financially support Mayweather's flashy lifestyle, are diametrically opposed to his ego-driven ways.




The 32-year old fighter flaunts rolls of $100 bills, drives around in pricey vehicles (one of which, a $500,000 Mercedes Maybach 57S, has been repossessed), and openly rips into both individuals and organizations at random.

Mayweather wants to be loved by his fellow Americans. I guess he didn't get the memo: people don't like angry, spoiled, ego-maniacs that never shut their mouths.

This isn't the only reason sports fans aren't in love with Mayweather, though.

Simply put, Americans don't love boxing anymore. From pay-per-view's monopolization of TV rights, to the lack of a compelling American heavyweight, boxing has lost its appeal across the United States.

Americans don't hate the player -- they hate the game.

Mayweather kept rambling on Tuesday: "Sometimes I'll sit back, I'll be in my theater sometimes, and I'll think: 'Imagine if I was the same fighter that I am, and I was the same person that I am, and I was from another country. Can you just imagine how big I'd be?'"

And in the next breath, as if he knew that every reporter before him was taken aback by his candid yet cocky reflection, he continued...

"But I wouldn't change my life for nothing in the world. There's nothing like being young, black and rich. But there are certain things you think about."

Yes, Floyd. There are certain things you think about.

No Surprises

We humans, relative to other organisms, can both process and store a remarkable amount of information in our brain.

To prevent ourselves from being overwhelmed by all this knowledge, we simplify things through grouping, or labeling.

This process of labeling helps to trigger memories and consolidate our ideas. But sometimes labeling leads to stereotyping.

And unfortunately, stereotypes can often lead to prejudice thoughts -- which tend to give rise to ignorance.

Across the Bowl Subdivision of D1 college football, there's this misguided perception that "mid-majors" -- namely, outsiders to the six major conferences -- are inferior to their BCS conference (or as I like to call them, power conference) counterparts.

This is the farthest thing from the truth -- and the first week of the 2009 season is yet another reminder of that.

Last Thursday night No. 16 Oregon visited No. 14 Boise State, the second game of a home-and-home series between the two programs, as Oregon looked to avenge their home loss to Boise from last season.

The Broncos, ranked only two spots ahead of the Ducks and playing on their signature blue turf, were favored by 3 points, a virtual push.

Prior to the game, Robert Smith of ESPN's College Football Live talked about Oregon's physicality, the weakness of Boise's front seven, and how their personnel simply couldn't match up.

Flash forward to the end of the first half: Oregon has a mere 13 yards of total offense, zero first downs, and is getting shutout by their small-conference neighbors.

I have all the respect in the world for Robert Smith. He was one of my favorite NFL running backs as a child, he does a nice job on-set at ESPN, and he's the epitome of class.

But Mr. Smith and most of his ESPN co-workers continually discount programs such as Boise State. And because ESPN (the unrivaled source for sports news) discounts them, the everyday sports fan does the same.

People assume that Boise and the like can't compete because they don't play "proven" competition on a weekly basis -- whatever that means.

Here are the facts: Boise State went 35-4 from '06-'08, including a 3-1 record versus BCS conference opponents. What more evidence do we need?

Okay, maybe Boise St. didn't surprise you on opening weekend.

But I'm sure BYU did when they met up with third-ranked Oklahoma in Dallas on Saturday night. Although the game was played on a neutral site, it was hardly a neutral crowd.

Despite being twenty three-point underdogs, the Cougars found a way to knock off the Sooners in Big 12 territory.

Yes, I know Sam Bradford (last year's Heisman Trophy winner) was injured during the game. And yes, we could have seen a different outcome had he not left the contest early.

But if Bradford didn't play for OU, or if we knew he was injured prior to the game, wouldn't the Sooners have been heavy favorites anyway?

The problem here is that programs like Brigham Young and Boise State aren't given the same kind of opportunities as traditional powers such as Oklahoma and Oregon.

The pollsters, as well as aloof BCS conference commissioners, either don't have confidence in small-school programs, or they don't want to give away any power.

Mid-major conferences aren't so established. Their players aren't recognized nationally. And they suffer greatly for this -- something they have no control over.

What they do have control over is the product on the field. And when given the rare opportunity to prove themselves, they've stepped up to the challenge.

If I'm going to make a case for D1 mid-majors, I can't forget to mention Utah.

The Utes have finished undefeated twice in the last five years. And of those two unblemished runs, not once did they have an opportunity to play for the national title.

Both seasons ('04 and '08) they only ranked as high as No. 6 entering the postseason. What's worse is, last year they were snubbed for two one-loss teams from BCS conferences.

One of those teams was Florida -- the eventual national champions.

Prior to Florida's National Title Game appearance versus Oklahoma, they knocked off then-No. 1 Alabama in the SEC Title Game. And guess who Utah got matched up with in the Sugar Bowl? You got it -- 'Bama.

The result was a dominating performance by the Utah defense. In fact, Utah played better versus Alabama than Florida did. They allowed less yardage, forced more turnovers, and won by a larger margin.

For all we know, Utah may have been the best team in the nation last year.

Of course, this all comes down to one dilemma: the need for a playoff system in college football.

America is supposed to be a democratic nation. But like our government, major college football functions like a dictatorship that benefits a very small group of people.

The Football Bowl Subdivision of college football needs to: a) implement a playoff system, b) drop the ridiculously long name, and c) stop assuming that David can't beat Goliath.

It doesn't surprise me when mid-majors beat big-conference programs. I look forward to the day that BCS conference commissioners can say the same.

Blue Days in The Bluegrass

Geography often determines whether a fan prefers college or professional sports. South Bend and Chapel Hill are college sports towns. New York and Dallas, on the other hand, are pro sports towns. Fans in some places don't have much of a choice, though.

Consider the entire state of Kentucky: With zero professional sports franchises, two of America's most proud college basketball programs, as well as two of the game's most decorated coaches, college sports rein supreme in the Bluegrass State.

Led by John Calipari and Rick Pitino, respectively, the University of Kentucky Wildcats and the University of Louisville Cardinals are the two most popular teams (of any sport) in the state of Kentucky.

Nearly four months ago, each school had reason to be excited: Kentucky, which has lost ten or more games in seven of the last ten seasons, had just signed Calipari, the most sought-after coach in all of basketball, to a long-term deal.

And in Louisville, despite being upset by Title Game-bound Michigan State on the doorstep of the Final Four, the Cardinals had finished a season in the Elite Eight or better for the third time in five seasons -- a commendable feat.

My thoughts at the time: These two developments were sure to bring UK back to prominence and kick-start another championship run for the U of L.

Of course, that was before Calipari was tied to multiple recruiting scandals at his former job, and before Pitino admitted to cheating on his wife of thirty-plus years.

Today, instead of the national discussion revolving around their coaching prowess, fans everywhere -- not just Kentuckians -- have shifted their focus to the off-court indiscretions of these coaching giants.

In fact, since I began writing this story there's more news out of the commonwealth: Memphis, Coach Cal's former employer, has been stripped of 38 wins (previously an NCAA record) and a Final Four appearance from 2007-08.

If you followed the Memphis basketball scandal this summer, or if you read my piece on Calipari from June, I'm sure you saw this coming.

In case you're lost, let me summarize: Memphis was forced to vacate those 38 wins because Derrick Rose, star point guard on the Tigers' 2007-08 team and the eventual No. 1 overall pick in the 2008 NBA Draft, had a stand-in take his SATs for him.

Neither you nor I was part of the investigation, so it's difficult for any of us to point the finger and say so-and-so was to blame, but I find it hard to believe that John Calipari didn't know that Derrick Rose was intellectually challenged when he recruited him.

Rose failed to meet NCAA standards on three previous occasions. And when his scores finally qualified, that test was taken in Detroit. In case you were unaware, Derrick Rose is from Chicago.

It's unknown what influence this will have on Calipari's reputation. The consensus among fans prior to this incident was that he was a win-at-all-costs type of guy. I would imagine that this situation will only re-affirm those feelings for most people.

Calipari may be (legally) off the hook, but if things don't go well in Lexington he could have a tough time finding another lucrative gig in college basketball.

And if that wasn't enough, the state of Kentucky took another hit when Rick Pitino decided to open his mouth recently. In the face of a sex scandal involving the now-estranged wife of his equipment manager, Pitino lashed out at the media for its coverage of the ongoing saga.

Pitino was especially sensitive about the release of audio and video recordings of phone calls and an interview with Karen Sypher, the woman at the heart of the scandal, which Pitino's wife has apparently seen and/or heard.

Let me get this straight: Rick Pitino (a devout Catholic) cheats on his wife and five children with the wife of a close friend/co-worker, allegedly pays for an abortion (because he didn't practice safe sex and would hate to ruin his reputation), keeps it all a secret for years, lies about anything ever happening when the woman attempts to blackmail him for millions of dollars, finally apologizes for an "indiscretion" (aka he doesn't have the guts to verbalize his actions), and he's mad at the world because his wife is pissed off...

World to Rick Pitino: You're an idiot. You deserve any ill-will that comes your way. How can you be mad at the media for doing their job when you're the one to blame?

Pitino is more at fault than Michael Vick as far as I'm concerned: To this very day Vick is persecuted by the public because he killed dogs. And he lost everything because of it: Millions of dollars in salary and endorsements, his job, his reputation, and most importantly, his freedom.

Meanwhile, Pitino has torn apart two families -- and he's the one who's mad? He won't go bankrupt. He won't have to find a new job. He certainly won't face jail time. However unfortunate, his lapse in morality cannot be tried in the courtroom.

Like Calipari, it's not likely that Rick Pitino will face any punishment from either the NCAA or his current employer. But he may face many questions from the parents of potential recruits. Would you send your child to a program that's led by a cheater and a liar?

I'm not a horse racing fan, but it's a shame that the Triple Crown doesn't come around until next spring. The citizens of Kentucky sure could use something else to talk about.

Sweet Home Minnesota

Brett Favre is a Minnesota Viking. It sounds funny and it may look funny. But when I stop to think about it, this is where the future Hall of Famer should have been last year.

Instead of wasting time in New York, figuring out a new offense, getting to know new players, as well a new division within a new conference, Number Four could have been throwing against three NFC North defenses that finished 18th, 21st, and 27th in passing touchdowns.

Fortunately, Favre's mediocre, one-year stint with the New York Jets is a thing of the past -- because it certainly felt awkward. The location was a far cry from what we (and Brett) were used to. The offense didn't complement his style of play. Even the jersey looked funny on him.

For some reason, though, a Viking uniform looks like a natural fit -- as do the playbook and the environs. Brett's familiarity with both the West Coast offense and the Black and Blue Division may be a huge advantage in 2009.

But while all signs point to a bounce-back year for the living legend, there are still some questions to be answered:

• Can Brett establish rapport with Minnesota's pass-catchers only a few weeks before the start of the regular season?
• Is his throwing shoulder fully recovered from offseason arthroscopic surgery?
• And the most pressing question: Will Brett fade in the final month of the season like he did last year?

There's only one reason for a team like the Vikings to sign a guy like Favre. They want to win now. But is he worth the two-year, $25 million contract he signed today?

You may be surprised by the following, but here are the facts...

Tavaris Jackson was a much better quarterback than Brett Favre over the final month of last season. Tavaris went 3-1, Brett went 1-3. Tavaris had eight touchdowns and four turnovers, Brett had three touchdowns and eight turnovers.

Regardless, Tavaris Jackson now finds himself behind Favre -- and maybe Sage Rosenfels, too -- on the Vikings depth chart. The fourth-year player doesn't sound happy about it, either.

"It's not a good feeling," said Jackson. And when asked about his future with the Vikings he replied, "I really don't know. I'm just taking it day-by-day right now. Just trying to get better. That's all I can do right now."

Jackson handled those questions nicely. But I know I wouldn't have. Both he and Sage Rosenfels were led to believe that they were in an open competition for the starting quarterback job. Instead, the Brett Favre circus is in town. And it isn't going anywhere.

Not only do Jackson and Rosenfels have to watch from the sidelines this season, but they now have to answer unyielding questions from reporters about their personal feeling on the whole Brett Favre ordeal. Oye vey!

This may not seem like a big deal, but NFL players are proud. This has to rub both quarterbacks -- as well as some of their teammates -- the wrong way. And although it remains to be seen whether or not this will cause a split in the locker room, this type of Favre-first behavior from the Vikings is similar to what we saw last year with the Jets.

Brett isolated himself from his teammates last season. He didn't reach out to them on or off the field, often played the I'm-a-Hall-of-Famer-to-be-blame-glame, and he even had his own locker room.

If Brett wants to have a successful season in '09, he'll need to communicate more with his teammates. As a 39-year old veteran of his stature, he should know that camaraderie isn't gained through practice reps alone.

But assuming Favre can build a relationship with skill players and remain healthy, I believe that things look good for the Favre-led Vikings this season.

Brett's familiarity with his surroundings and his admiration for head coach Brad Childress aren't the only reasons to get excited: The left side of the Vikings offensive line (Brett's blind side) may the best in the NFL, and the backfield happens to feature some guy named Peterson. Apparently he's some kind of freakish athlete.

Plus the Vikings have a good defense, as they finished 6th in total yards and 1st against the run last season. This means that the offense won't need to force turnover-laden play calls coming from behind very often.

And on top of all of that, the Vikes play in an average division and against one of the easiest schedules in the league. If they won ten games last season with Gus Frerotte and Tavaris Jackson, how many will they win this season with Favre?

So, Brett Favre is a Minnesota Viking after all. I know this may hurt some Packer fans out there, but I think it's a good fit. And yes, he's missed valuable time with his teammates this past month, prompting some people to claim he should have signed on the dotted line sooner.

Yep... last year.

Day of Atonement

Humans are a forgiving species. Whether this is some innate characteristic or if it's learned through religion or some secular principle, we, the people, forgive one another and move forward.

Unfortunately, some people -- and for whatever reason, many in the Philadelphia metropolitan area -- let preconceptions or narrow-mindedness skew their outlook. Not only is this unfair, but it also goes against any line of progressive thinking.

Michael Vick was raised in a culture of poor decision-makers. And before going to prison for killing dogs, he surrounded himself with poor decision-makers. Consequently, Mike Vick made many bad choices of his own.

Does that mean he's bound to do so for the rest of his time on Earth? Not necessarily. No one knows what lies ahead for Michael Vick except Michael Vick. But he does appear to have honest intentions.

Before his prison sentence, Vick was an overpaid athlete who acted like a thug and financed a dogfighting ring for fun. Today he's soft-spoken, humbled by the experience, as he should be.

His tone has changed. His ego is gone. He's ready to make a change for the better. What more can be asked of him? If you were a high-profile citizen found guilty of a crime, served the time, and vowed to come out a stronger person, wouldn't you expect to be accepted back into society?

Wouldn't you want to continue your career? Should the man be forced to do something other than play football, the one profession at which he excels, the one thing he's trained his entire life for?

Unfortunately, those that cannot -- or really, do not -- want Michael Vick to turn his life around (let alone return to the NFL) don't know about the rough childhood he experienced. The psychological toll that Vick's childhood took on him may have contributed to his violent dogfighting history.

Every year there are cases of rape, domestic violence, and substance abuse around the NFL and beyond. These, too, are premeditated crimes that may be rooted in a rough childhood that lacked stability. But charges such as these are often dropped.

Vick, on the other hand, was used to set an example. In fact, the average dog-loving sports fans thought that his 23-month sentence was a bit harsh. Vick did the time, though. And for one reason or another, other criminals have not.

But before anyone knew about Michael Vick's dogfighting ways, many sports fans disliked him for his appearance, or for the way he presented himself. They didn't like the way he spoke. They didn't like the way he dressed. They didn't even like the way he walked.

We don't know the Mike Vick of today, though. He may be a different person. He can't be discounted for the way he appeared more than two years ago.

A big reason for the anti-Vick sentiment in the two days since his signing is envy. People have a hard time understanding why Michael Vick is going to earn millions of dollars again. Or why he's going to get his time in the spotlight.

For one thing, Vick has loads of debt to pay off. So he certainly isn't "netting" millions. And any time he's going to see in the spotlight will be spent answering tough questions from relentless reporters. So it's not exactly a walk in the park. But it comes with the territory.

Some people -- and especially any football-hating dog-lovers out there -- will resent Vick's $1.6 million contract. They'll see it as, 'I'm a good person. Michael Vick isn't. Where's my million-dollar contract?'.

That's America for you. This hypocritical, predominantly-Christian nation can tell Mike Vick, 'You shall not kill. It's wrong. It's unethical. It goes against the Ten Commandments, our list of moral imperatives.'

Meanwhile, they, too, are sinners. What happened to, 'You shall not covet anything that belongs to your neighbor'?

The Philadelphia Eagles signed Michael Vick to a non-guaranteed one-year contract worth $1.6 million with a team option for a second season at $5.2 million. From a business aspect, this is a great move.

Vick was once the highest-paid player in the NFL. If his skills are anywhere close to where they were in 2006, the Eagles have hit the jackpot.

Therefore, football-wise, this signing can't hurt. But it may help. Vick is a world-class athlete and a decent quarterback that will not be asked to start or contribute significantly at all this season. Plus, he is one hell of an insurance policy for the Eagles' injured-riddled starting quarterback, Donovan McNabb.

The Eagles made this move for another reason, though. It's not just about football. Non-football fans will tell you it is -- but it isn't. Owner Jeffery Lurie wanted to give Michael Vick a chance at re-establishing his career.

If Michael Vick was your child, wouldn't you want him to be given a second chance? If your answer is no, then you're lying to yourself.

For those of you unfamiliar with the Philadelphia Eagles organization, they value character and have high expectations for their players. Do you think the Eagles would agree to signing someone they thought couldn't meet those expectations?

With the blessing of Lurie, head coach Andy Reid, team captain Donovan McNabb, as well as Tony Dungy, one of the most respected men involved with the NFL, Michael Vick began his journey back to the league yesterday.

He spoke softly, answered questions directly, and expressed gratitude for the opportunity to resume his career. At this stage, not much else can be asked of him.

So we now know that Michael Vick will touch an NFL field again. What we don't know is how he's changed in the two years he's been away -- or how the public will respond to him in weeks, months, or a year from now.

Hopefully people will give him a chance. Hopefully they can put the past behind them, focus on the ever-changing present, and know that Michael Vick is working hard to become a better person.

2009 Fantasy Football Preview

Changing of the Guard

I've been the sole owner of a fantasy football team for five years. Heading into my draft each season, I've had two objectives: 1) grab a couple -- if not three -- of the best running backs early and 2) wait for a quarterback.

In fact, I'm so headstrong that I've selected a running back in each of the first two rounds in four of five seasons and I've never selected a quarterback earlier than the fourth round. Of course, this methodical strategy of mine has only netted one league championship.

However, the same strategy has worked wonders for other owners: In the five-year history of the IFFL (that's my league), our league champion has selected running backs in each of the first two rounds four times (sound familiar?) and, in most cases, has waited for a quarterback.

Does that make this the winning formula? Not necessarily. Depending on draft position and personal preference, there are many routes a fantasy owner can take. But the NFL is changing. And adapting to these changes may help win a fantasy championship in 2009.

First, quarterbacks are scoring more in fantasy football than ever before. Rather than using the run to set up the pass, many NFL teams are doing just the opposite. And because of that, fantasy quarterbacks are more valuable today. The number of 300-point quarterbacks from 2004 to 2008 has gone from one, to two, to five, to six.

Thanks to this aerial revolution, so to speak, pass catchers are also cashing in. I mean, who considered drafting a team's third receiver ten years ago? Today, on the other hand, teams spread the ball around so much that it's not uncommon to draft a team's third wideout.

I made sure to use the term "pass catcher" a moment ago because I can't forget about tight ends. A decade ago Shannon Sharpe and Tony Gonzalez were the only two ends that could dream of 75 catches, 750 yards or 7 touchdowns. This season there are about ten guys who could reach one or more of those plateaus.

Does this mean that running backs are less valuable today, as opposed to five or ten years ago? No, it just means that tight ends are catching up to wide receivers, and receivers are catching up to running backs.

Speaking of running backs: As many points as the top backs score, how much of a sure thing are they? Looking back at my 2008 pre-draft rankings, only four of my top ten backs finished there at season's end, while not one exceeded expectations.

Now maybe '08 was an anomaly, but of the four highest-scoring fantasy running backs last year (DeAngelo Williams, Michael Turner, Matt Forte and Thomas Jones), fourteen was as high as I had any of them ranked heading into draft night.

Plus, the overwhelming majority of NFL teams split carries to keep their backs fresh - and in turn, healthy. Now this certainly creates depth at the position, but it takes away from first-string backs.

Judging by the points I've made above, you may think I've abandoned my running back-first philosophy. Not exactly. I've just discovered that the NFL is changing. And when the NFL changes, sometimes fantasy football changes.

One thing hasn't changed, though: the value of a 250 or 300-pt running back. People wonder why backs dominate the first round. Here's my conclusion...

Depending on the offense, there are more than sixty-four starting wide receivers in the NFL, but only about twenty-five (taking flex players into account) in fantasy. Meanwhile, NFL teams only start one running back (and at least half split carries), while in fantasy there are about twenty-five. In other words, it's almost necessary to grab the top running backs while they're hot.

I may have just fried your brain with all that. You may be thinking, "What is this guy talking about? Does he support a running back-laden draft strategy or not?" I'm sorry if I've caused any confusion.

I just want all fantasy owners out there to know that it's okay to grab a quarterback or receiver in the first round. You don't have to feel pressured into taking a chance on a 200-point back in the middle or end of the first round of your draft when there are similarly-scoring options at receiver. And why feel guilty "reaching" for a quarterback? If you think someone's going to have a 2007 Tom Brady-like season, take him in the first round.

But as I stated earlier, your first round selection -- as well as all subsequent draft picks -- are going to be heavily influenced by your draft position and personal preference.

So has there been a changing of the guard? Should you refrain from taking a running back with your top pick this year because some wannabe fantasy guru has told you that quarterbacks and receivers are more valuable today than ever? That's for you to decide...

Rookies, and Sleepers, and Busts! Oh, my!

I've never been a huge fan of rookies when it comes to fantasy football. Running backs? Maybe. Quarterbacks and wide receivers? Not so much.

One of the great storylines of '08, however, was the surprising influx of effective rookies - most of which were running backs. Five of the twenty-four top backs last season were rookies, and even more made a fantasy impact.

Are we going to see a repeat of that in '09? It's doubtful. But if any rookie produces enough to garner a starting spot on your squad this season, he's probably one the five (in order of fantasy relevance) listed below.


1. Chris Wells, RB, Cardinals -- In 2007 the Ohio State Buckeyes strolled into State College, Pennsylvania for a night game versus the Penn State Nittany Lions. For those of you fortunate enough to have witnessed such an event, you're aware of the ruckus that this causes in Centre County. But for the Wells-led Buckeyes, neither the noise nor the defense was a problem.

I was there. And Chris "Beanie" Wells did not disappoint. I had never been so frustrated yet, at the same time, in awe of an opposing player before. Beanie finished the day with 133 yards on 25 carries, only two of which resulted in a loss of yardage. And he seemed to get better as the night went on. His power was imposing, his speed was surprising, his patience was impressive. From that day forward I've been a Chris Wells fan.

His health slowed him down a bit last year and, to the delight of the Arizona Cardinals, the former Buckeye dropped to the end of the first round in April's draft. In other words, Wells not only has ridiculous skills, but he's also in an ideal situation playing for a winning team.

I would be surprised if Chris Wells isn't the top offensive rookie in 2009. Edge is gone, Tim Hightower hasn't proven he can be the man, the offensive line is young and improving and, for what it's worth, the Cards have the NFL's best passing attack to relieve some pressure.

2. Donald Brown, RB, Colts -- In April Mike Mayock of the NFL Network claimed that Donald Brown was the best running back of the 2009 rookie class. And as usual, I disagreed with the man.

I'm still not completely sold on the former Connecticut product, but he enters his rookie year in as good, if not better, a situation as Chris Wells. For starters, the Colts' offense has consistently been one of the few best units in the league over the last decade. That always helps. And Brown will surely have many opportunities to prove himself.

Also in Brown's favor is the uncertainty surrounding Joseph Addai. The former top-tier back struggled big-time last year with injuries to himself and teammates. Between Addai's long list of ailments and his perceived lack of aggression, the Colts needed an insurance policy.

Can Brown be an elite running back in the NFL? I'm not sure. But he's definitely going to have many chances to prove me wrong. As far as fantasy productivity, Donald Brown will make an impact in '09.


3. Knowshon Moreno, RB, Broncos -- My man-crush on Knowshon Moreno is as heavy as the one I have for Beanie Wells. This dude dominated the SEC McFadden-stlye the last few years, he's jack-nasty, and Jersey Fresh. What's not to like?

Well, besides the fact that the Broncos aren't the Broncos of old (aka Running Back Heaven) and because he has about thirty guys competing for the starting spot, I don't expect Moreno to blow up like Bronco rookie backs of the past.
He certainly has the potential to make an impact, though. I love Knowshon Moreno, but I'm not a huge fan of him as a fantasy back this year - that's all. I expect the aforementioned Wells and Brown to get many more opportunities, which bumps Moreno down a tad on this list. But if I was to start a team with any rookie back this year, Moreno may be my guy.


4. Percy Harvin, WR, Vikings -- Harvin makes this list by default. Not to take anything away from him, but like last year's rookie wideouts, the 2009 receiver class is shallow.

I've never been a big Michael Crabtree fan, Jeremy Maclin and Hakeem Nicks have a lot of guys to compete with in Philly and New York, respectively, and I'm sorry but no Raider -- and that includes the speedy Darrius Heyward-Bey -- is ever a factor in fantasy football.

Percy Harvin is the definition of an all-purpose back. He may have a bit of a fumbling problem, but he can be used in so many ways (see: Florida Gators circa '06-'08). Looking at his college numbers, you may assume that Harvin was a running back. But he's just that versatile.

Considering who the Vikings at receiver, it's hard to not to envision Percy Harvin making an impact in 2009. Even if he's only the team's third receiver, he's going to get his touches. I don't suggest using a high draft pick on Harvin - but if you can grab him in the final rounds of your draft, you may be rewarded handsomely.


5. Brian Robiskie, WR, Browns -- This may be a reach, but Brian Robiskie was one of the most underrated wide receivers in college football over the last few years.

And like all the guys on this list, he's going to play right away. He's tall, has great hands, runs impeccable routes, and will have the chance to start from day one. He may not be the fastest wideout in the world, but Robiskie is a solid possession receiver.

I'm not saying he's going to be a fantasy stud this year, but I fully expect Brian Robiskie to rack up more receiving yards than any of his rookie counterparts.




Next I bring you my likely sleepers for 2009. The following guys are all due for big seasons because either a) they signed with a new team, putting them in a better position to score some fantasy points or b) they no longer have injuries to themselves or others holding them back. Without further ado...

1. Derrick Ward, RB, Buccaneers -- Although injuries slowed him down some in '07, Derrick Ward has been one of the league's best reserve running backs for two years running. And now he has the chance to prove he can be the main man.

He's strong, runs low to the ground, and has great hands. In his last two seasons as a Giant, Ward averaged 5.3 yards per carry. And if you pro-rate his receptions over that span, he would have averaged 45 grabs per season among a crowded Giants backfield.

He may have competition in Tampa with Earnest Graham still around, but if anyone can be this year's Michael Turner, it's Derrick Ward.


2. T.J. Houshmandzadeh, WR, Seahawks -- T.J. Housh suffered last year due to the absence of Carson Palmer. This year Housh not only has a healthy quarterback (or so we think) in Matt Hasselbeck, but he's the number one target for his new team. And by the way, the NFC West is still one of the worst divisions in football.

Despite poor quarterback play all year in Cincy, only four NFL receivers caught more balls than Housh in '08. All signs point to a major comeback for the humble wideout. And the best part about drafting Housh: You can get him later than any 90+ catch receiver.


3. Ryan Grant, RB, Packers -- Like LT, Ryan Grant dealt with an injury for most of last season. And although he played through the pain, his fantasy owners were still feeling it.

Somehow Grant managed to gain 1,300+ yards and score 5 total touchdowns anyway. Free from injury in 2009, he may be back to where he was in the second half of the '07 season.

Grant has a very good passing attack to lean on and an average division (as far as run defense goes) to play against. And don't think for a second that Brandon Jackson will cut into his carries. Grant will likely end up a top-15 back. And like the others on this list, you don't have to reach to get him.


4. Carson Palmer, QB, Bengals -- You may surprised that Carson Palmer is on this list. He's one of the few best quarterbacks in the league when healthy. Does that qualify as a sleeper? Let's say it does. Well, he just lost T.J., his go-to receiver. Sorry, Chad. In that case, is he worthy?

Simply put, yes and yes. Many people -- owners and experts alike -- are projecting Palmer as a fantasy backup. To me, that's wild. He may very well be a top-5 quarterback in 2009. Of course much of that depends on his relationship with Chad Johnson.

Yes, I know Housh is gone - but Chris Henry (assuming he can stay out of trouble) is no slouch. Palmer does have to deal with the Steelers and Ravens twice each season, but studs are studs. Carson Palmer may be just that is '09.


5. Wes Welker, WR, Patriots -- After exploding onto the scene in '07, Welker took an off-year of sorts in '08. But if you lost your three-time Super Bowl-winning quarterback and replaced him with a first-year starter, wouldn't you experience a drop-off in production?

Welker has Randy Moss lining up on the other side, a healthy Tom Brady, and possibly the quickest feet in the NFL. He'll get back to his old form. Don't be surprised if Wes Welker finishes among the top ten wide receivers in 2009.




And finally, I give you my likely busts. You may not agree with all of these, but I'll at least give you good reason to consider them. Whether I see an injury on the horizon or I think their '08 performance was a fluke, the names below could be headed toward a disappointing 2009...


1. Michael Turner, RB, Falcons -- Michael Turner had fresh legs entering the 2008 season. That's not exactly the case today. After carrying the ball 376 times last year, an injury (or outright disappointment) is likely in '09.

In case you haven't heard of The Curse of 370, let me explain: Over the last ten years a number of NFL running backs have carried the ball 370+ times, only to see their productivity tail off significantly the following year.

Of all the times that a back has exceeded the 370 mark, only twice has that player returned to top-10 form the following season. By the way, those two players were Marshall Faulk and LaDainian Tomlinson, two of few best fantasy football players ever.

I love Michael Tuner as a player. I've enjoyed watching him run people over since his days at Northern Illinois. But the numbers rarely lie. I would bet on Turner being the biggest failure of the upcoming season.


2. Kurt Warner, QB, Cardinals -- The Arizona Cardinals and Kurt Warner may have been the story of the year across the NFL in 2008. But his downfall in 2009 may also steal headlines.

For starters, Warner has never played two full seasons back-to-back in his career. The chances of him pulling it off for the first time ever this year, at the age of 38, aren't very good.

Like Turner, if Warner can remain healthy, I don't see why he can't repeat (or at least come close to) his performance from last year. I just wouldn't bet on an injury-free 2009 for Kurt Warner.


3. Thomas Jones, RB, Jets -- I considered leaving Jones off this list because I can see both sides of the coin. However, I decided that the cons outweighed the pros. I have many reasons for Thomas Jones making the 2009 Bust List. Here are a few...

• He is an angry man. He's never content with anything: his workload, his contract, his girlfriend. I can't see the guy staying happy long enough to repeat what he did last year.
• The Jets love Leon Washington and Shonn Grenne. I wouldn't be surprised if both of these players outplay Jones in '09.
• But let's say, for argument's sake, that that doesn't happen. At the age of 31, can Thomas Jones really combine for 15 total touchdowns again?
  

4. Brandon Marshall, WR, Broncos -- Another angry man is wide receiver Brandon Marshall. He's constantly in trouble, he stays complaining about his contract, and he never stops talking trash.

I'm not going to lie, I love him. I've had him in each of the last two seasons and he's been one of my only steady performers both years.

But between his new quarterback situation, his constant contract issues, and his offseason hip surgery, I wouldn't be surprised to see B-Marsh fall off the map in 2009.


5. Antonio Bryant, WR, Buccaneers -- Antonio Bryant may be one of the more obvious selections for this list. But hey, after making some gutsy picks earlier (i.e. Michael Turner) I think I'm entitled to a gimmie.

Bryant had a very surprising 2008 season. But now he has a new coach, coordinator, running back, quarterback, and tight end. Sell high - because Bryant's value is plummeting.

Same Old, Same Old

My home team, the Philadelphia Phillies, have lacked an "ace" for as long as I've watched baseball. Sure, I've seen some good pitchers, some guys that have showed signs of greatness. But no one has been able to do it for an extended period.

The pitching was so bad at one point that I actually used to root against the Phils -- or at least when they played the Atlanta Braves. What's a Little League pitcher to do when his home team can't provide a star hurler to idolize?

Since I was a lefty, I fell in love with Tom Glavine (a fellow southpaw) and the Braves' pitching staff. (A note to any GMs out there: You know it's time to improve your team when kids resort to cheering for your division-leading rivals.) Anyhow, I had a difficult time rooting for the Phillies when I was young.

But it wasn't just the pitching. The Phillies were bad at everything. As far as pitchers go, though, Curt Schilling -- who naturally had his best years post-Philadelphia -- was by far the best of my youth. Until he was traded, of course.

And since that fateful day the Phils' rotation has been like a carousel of ponies -- when all we want is a thoroughbred or two. Names such as Wolf, Padilla, Millwood, Myers, and Lieber (to name a few) have teased us with the occasional gem. Yet none of them have been consistent enough to be considered an ace.

Cole Hamels, the present and foreseeable future of the Phillies' staff, is often compared to Hall of Famer Steve Carlton. Lanky and left-handed with a knack for striking guys out, I can see the resemblance. But let's not get ahead of ourselves.

Steve Carlton only flirted with an earned run average of 4.00 once in his 14 seasons in Philadelphia. Hamels is on pace to finish above that mark for the second time in his four major league seasons. And while he has improved in each of his first three campaigns, Hamels is having the worst season of his young career in 2009.

With an ERA of 4.87 and a WHIP (walks and hits allowed per inning) of 1.38, both career worsts, Hamels has looked like anyone but Steve Carlton this season. On a positive note, Hamels is averaging a mere 1.7 walks for every nine innings of work, a career low.

I'm no pitching coach, but I do know that he must be close to turning things around. He's obviously not lacking in the accuracy department if he's not walking guys. But like I stated before, an ace needs to show consistency. Cole Hamels has not shown consistency.

Hamels' struggles aren't the only issue, though. The entire rotation, as well as the usually stellar bullpen, has been rocked this season. At the All-Star break the Phillies' staff ranked at or near the bottom of every statistical category of importance.

The good thing about this -- if there is a good thing -- is that the Phillies, despite their sub-par pitching, hold a five-game lead over the second-place Marlins following their 4-0 win on Thursday night. Thanks to a pair of homers by Raul Ibanez and a one-hit, seven-inning masterpiece by Jamie Moyer, the Phils were able to get a running start to their second half.

For now, the Phillies are a legitimate contender in the National League. If the addition of Pedro Martinez is the final change to their pitching staff, the Phils could absolutely win the pennant again -- with a few more lucky breaks, some timely hitting, and a hot streak in late September. But that's a lot to ask.

I'm just tired of the same old mediocrity. Imagine how much easier life would be with a sure-fire ace out there. If the Phillies can win games without good pitching, what will they do when they finally get it?

Risk/Reward

Paul Coffey. Derian Hatcher. Chris Pronger. What do these three have in common?

Besides being among the greatest defensemen of their respective generations, each of them joined the Philadelphia Flyers late in their careers, brought in to help the organization win a Stanley Cup. Coffey and Hatcher failed to do so. Pronger looks to buck that trend.

"I'm very excited," said the 34-year old Pronger. "The fans are passionate about hockey. The style of play the Flyers play certainly fits mine. They've got some great young talent. I hope to help them win a Stanley Cup."

That's good news. Because expectations are high. And the Flyers gave up a lot (a 19-year old defensemen with loads of potential, a 50-point scorer, and two first-round draft picks) for his services.

Some hockey fans say the Flyers gave up too much. After all, Chris Pronger isn't getting any younger. This is true. But the guys the Flyers gave up to acquire the future Hall of Famer don't yet possess the leadership, talent, or playoff experience that Pronger does. Then again, we thought Coffey and Hatcher possessed those same qualities.

There's no denying Pronger's winning ways, though. He led the St. Louis Blues to nine playoff appearances in nine seasons (the Blues went on to miss the playoffs for the first time in 25 seasons the following season). His next team, the Edmonton Oilers, advanced to the Stanley Cup Finals in his one season with the club. And after requesting a trade that landed him in Anaheim, Pronger led the Ducks to a Finals win the following year.

He may not score like Malkin or skate like Ovechkin, but Chris Pronger is still a force in this league. He's one of the few players that's transitioned well to the post-lockout NHL rules changes and he certainly seems to know a winner when he sees one.

The Flyers may have taken a risk in acquiring Chris Pronger. But based on his past -- and considering how close the Flyers are to contending for a championship -- it's a risk worth taking.

Coming of Age

In America, we typically associate a "coming of age" with late adolescence. But the truth is, some people (or things) take longer to adapt to their surroundings.

The Big Ten, America's oldest college football conference, has been known for generations as a run-first, smash-mouth league. And in the past, those characterizations were, if anything, compliments. But in recent years they've taken on new meaning.

Today, most people identify the Big Ten as an out-of-touch league whose bite doesn't match its bark. And since it's last National Champion in 2002, the numbers support those claims: Since the '02-'03 bowl season, the Big Ten has a combined bowl record of 15-28 (the worst of the six "power" conferences), including a 3-8 record in BCS bowls.

Does that make the Big Ten the sixth best conference in the land? That's debatable. What isn't is the fact that the Big Ten is making strides to turn things around. From new systems to more dynamic athletes, I believe the conference is on its way to a comeback.

It may have taken some time to catch on, but nearly every Big Ten program -- with Wisconsin being the lone exception -- has installed some type of spread offense. And considering how bad the Badgers' offense looked in '08, maybe they should consider joining the club.

Often, the casual fan will mistaken any shotgun formation as a spread. But where the quarterback lines up is not what defines this revolutionary scheme. While no two are alike, a spread is easy to identify: A formation is classified as such when three or more offensive skill players are spaced horizontally across the field, on or near the line of scrimmage. The idea is to, literally, spread the opposing defense. This makes the middle of the defense more vulnerable to the run and opens passing lanes for the quarterback to throw.

This basic principle, though never so widespread, has been around for years. But today the game's brightest offensive coaches are finding ways to build on that philosophy. Many of America's most successful football programs are incorporating spread formations into their offenses. And the Big Ten is no exception.

While Purdue has used a pass-heavy spread for years, Michigan is just beginning to make the transition to Rich Rodriguez's zone read, triple option spread. Others, such as the Big Ten's last two Rose Bowl representatives, Illinois and Penn State, prefer to use pro-style spreads, utilizing fullbacks and tight ends. But of course, these schemes are only effective if they have the right personnel. And it all starts with the quarterback position.

The most significant change over the last few years may indeed be the quarterback play. Instead of one-dimensional pocket passers that "manage" the game, the Big Ten -- due in part to the aforementioned changes in offensive philosophy -- features a handful of athletes at quarterback that can take control of a game.

Without digging too deep into the Big Ten history books, I'd like to share a few names that have garnered First Team All-Big Ten honors at quarterback since 1993, the year in which the league expanded to eleven schools. Out of convenience, I've listed only three players, each separated by five years, all of whom fit the mold of the "classic" Big Ten quarterback:

• Darrell Bevell (Wisconsin, 1993)
  
• Joe Germaine (Ohio State, 1998)
  
• John Navarre (Michigan, 2003)
  

Each of these players were above-average quarterbacks known more (or should I say, only?) for their throwing abilities. Quite the contrary, the Big Ten's headliner quarterbacks of 2009 are three multi-dimensional athletes. These three players (Isiah "Juice" Williams of Illinois, Daryll Clark of Penn State, and Terrelle Pryor of Ohio State) have taken the conference by storm the last two seasons. And they don't look to be slowing down, either.

Williams and Clark, both seniors heading into '09, each received All-Big Ten honors last season. And Pryor, the nation's No. 1 recruit and the Big Ten Freshman of the Year in '08, may have the most upside of the three. Is it a coincidence that Illinois, Penn State, and Ohio State are among the Big Ten favorites in 2009?

It's difficult to deny the Big Ten's rise in offensive production over the last few years. From top to bottom, each conference representative is scoring more touchdowns than ever before. The following figures are the averages of the Big Ten's highest and lowest touchdown totals over the last five seasons:

• 2004 -- 37 (high: 50, low: 24)
• 2005 -- 38.5 (high: 56, low: 21)
  
• 2006 -- 43 (high: 61, low: 25)
  
• 2007 -- 42 (high: 56, low: 28)
  
• 2008 -- 47 (high: 63, low: 31)

Note that (besides a minimal drop '06 to '07) the number of offensive touchdowns has risen steadily over this time period. Actually, a 27% rise in touchdowns over a five-year span is more than steady - it's remarkable.

But these offenses will eventually plateau. Defensive coaches will begin to recruit players to fit their system. And believe it or not, that's when we'll see a turnaround in the Big Ten.

After all, that 3-8 BCS bowl record I mentioned above is due more to a lack of defense than a lack of offense. In those eleven games, Big Ten teams scored a respectable 24.9 points per game. Meanwhile, they allowed an embarrassing 32.6 per game.

There will continue to be doubters. They'll trash the Big Ten for being old-fashioned or slow. But soon enough, Big Ten teams will start to win big games against SEC, Big 12, and Pac-10 opponents. It's certainly taken a few years to catch up - but I think the Big Ten is finally coming of age.

Certified Sales Professional

One day over winter break I gave my grandfather a hand with his Christmas decorations. Since he and my grandmother have about, oh, one hundred and twenty boxes of decorations, we had plenty to talk about. Pop asked about school, how I did in the fall, what classes I was taking in the spring, and so on.

After mentioning that philosophy was on my spring roster, he told me about his experience with the subject from his days at West Chester. He told me that one phrase, something his professor once said, has stuck him throughout the years: "We're learning more and more about less and less."

This professor meant, in the words of my grandfather, that everyone wants to be a "specialist." And he didn't mean it in a bad way, either. If someone has a heart condition, are they going to see a cardiologist or their family doctor?

The sports world has its share of specialists, too. There are long snappers in football, sharp shooters in basketball, designated hitters in baseball, and fist-throwing goons in hockey. And while specialists are typically good in sports, there's a certain kind that isn't.

Meet John Calipari, the new head coach at The University of Kentucky, America's winningest college basketball program. Many know him as the ultra-confident coach that's guided two different teams to the Final Four. Some know him as the guy that John Chaney went after in a post-game press conference. But Mr. Calipari -- who, by the way, has a degree in marketing -- is much more than that.

To his credit, Calipari is a great motivator. Whether at UMass or Memphis, he's consistently taken unheralded teams and turned them into contenders overnight. As far as motivation and preparation are concerned, he may be the best in college basketball.

But John Calipari is best known for being a master recruiter. No one convinces young athletes to sign on the dotted line better than this guy. Sure, being a great motivator will win a game here or there - but having great players is the key to sustained success.

Unfortunately, in this culture of steroid-abusing con artists and two-timing executives, being the best at anything -- and that includes the recruitment of high school athletes -- will surely draw skepticism from the public.

Lately, the skeptics have been overwhelmingly critical of Calipari. Exhibit A: The University of Memphis, Calipari's former employer, is facing allegations that Derrick Rose (one-year wonder guard at Memphis, last year's No. 1 overall pick, and the '08-'09 NBA Rookie of the Year) had someone take his SATs for him.

If there's any truth to these allegations, Memphis could have 38 wins and a Final Four appearance from '07-'08 erased from the record books. In the meantime, Calipari has been informed that he is not at risk in this investigation.

For those of you who are counting, this would mean that both of Coach Cal's Final Four appearances -- one at UMass, one at Memphis -- would be erased from history because of off-court scandals.

His first appearance was vacated because Marcus Camby (former NCAA Player of the Year and, to this day, Calipari's greatest NBA product) was found to have accepted cash, jewelry, rental cars, and prostitutes from two sports agents. Calipari was eventually cleared of any wrongdoing in the matter.

But these aren't the only instances of shady business involving Coach Cal. The latest scandal out of the Bible Belt involves former Memphis forward Robert Dozier.

According to several reports, The University of Georgia withdrew a scholarship offer to Dozier in 2004 after "fishy" entrance exam scores. His initial test score of 1260 (out of a possible 1600) raised red flags because they didn't coincide with his high school GPA.

When Georgia had Dozier re-take his SATs, his score dropped 540 points - rather, he had someone take his first test for him. And as soon as Georgia removed themselves from the situation, Calipari and the Memphis Tigers were quick to land the prep star.

If these allegations -- the second of such kind regarding a member of Calipari's '07-'08 Final Four team at Memphis -- are found to be true, the resume of college basketball's greatest salesman will feature yet another asterisk.

Some will defend John Calipari. They'll claim he can't control the sticky situations in which he's been involved. And to some degree, that's a fair remark.

But there's one thing he can control: the type of student-athlete he recruits. I don't expect college coaches to babysit, hold hands, or tuck their athletes in at night. I do expect them to know the type of kid they're giving a free scholarship.

Young men aged eighteen to twenty-one -- regardless of whether or not they play a sport in college -- are going to drink alcohol, smoke marijuana, or get in a fight on occasion. The average kid participates in these, let's call them, "extra-curricular" activities.

However, the average kid does not commit premeditated crimes such as accepting money from agents, having sex with prostitutes, cheating on SATs, or lying to admissions offices.

The alleged missteps of the oft-maligned coach, his former players, and the institutions they represented don't surprise me. The most shocking part of this ongoing saga is that The University of Kentucky has taken a chance on such a controversial figure. Based on his checkered past, Coach Cal doesn't seem to have much regard for grade point averages or graduation rates.

But because basketball (and football, for that matter) at the Division 1 level earn so much money for their schools, conferences, and the NCAA, the market is highly competitive. So in that sense, I can empathize with the pressure to succeed.

The longer a program such as UK basketball struggles to rise above mediocrity, the more likely they are to lower their standards. But at some point a line needs to be drawn. When will schools such as Kentucky put integrity before dollar signs? The University of Kentucky could very well be the victim of the next high-profile recruiting scandal.

There should be no place for slick salesmen like John Calipari in college athletics. If the NCAA wants to crack down on illegal dealings and hold onto whatever purity remains, they need to come down hard on the individuals that threaten the values of their organization.

What You've Been Missing

I may be wrong, but I feel as though I'm the only person watching the NHL Playoffs this season. Everyone I talk to says, "Yea, I saw the highlights." The highlights? Every second of the NHL Playoffs is a highlight. Maybe I'm just a huge geek when it comes to sports, but I can't understand why others aren't feeling the love.

Okay, maybe I can. Versus, a network that some Americans don't even have, is the only cable network broadcasting NHL games. And they aren't even good at it. Listen closely to their broadcasts. They're hilarious. I don't know what it means to "knife" the puck or for the puck to be "outletted," but the play-by-play guys at Versus create new words every broadcast. And as a broadcaster, if the fans know you're there, you aren't doing a good enough job.

Fortunately for us puckheads, NBC covers some weekend games during the season and most of the Stanley Cup Final - if NBC's any consolation. It's not quite ABC/ESPN, but I'll take what I can get. At least I don't have to hear the verb "knife" twenty-seven times throughout their broadcasts.

All I know is this: If ABC/ESPN won't pick up your games, you have a problem. They're called "The Worldwide Leader in Sports." If your games don't air on their network, essentially, you don't matter. As long as ESPN continues their boycott of NHL hockey, the league is going to have a difficult time marketing their product. And this lack of viewership is rooter deeper than we realize.

It starts at a young age when kids are getting into sports. Because of how costly hockey can be, not enough children are playing. Kids that do play hockey are either born into money or their parents go to great lengths to make sure they can afford it. Often, a kid that plays hockey only plays hockey.

As for the general public, their interest has a lot to do with the region in which they live. Most people in New Mexico couldn't care less about hockey. On the other hand, most people in New Hampshire live for it. The NHL needs to target those that lie in the middle.

And the best way to do that is to ride the coattails of the league's young stars. Look at the transition the NBA has made over the last five years. They stopped pushing Allen Iverson and Steve Francis on people and started to run ads featuring LeBron James and Chris Paul. The NHL's biggest stars -- especially their North American-born, English-speaking stars -- need to become household names.

As far as quality of play is concerned, the National Hockey League doesn't have much to worry about. It's brimming with young talent and, considering both No. 1 seeds failed to reach the Conference Finals this postseason, there's loads of parity.

If fast-paced action is what you're looking for, there isn't a sport that rivals hockey. Sure, basketball comes close. But as one of my readers pointed out recently, the first three quarters are nearly irrelevant. Plus, there are about two hundred points scored in each basketball game. Every goal is huge in hockey.

Maybe you're looking for some NFL-style violence. Hockey surely isn't lacking in that department. There's as much hitting in hockey as there is in football, and hockey players usually hit one another way past the whistle.

That leads us to fighting: Who doesn't like to watch a good fight? Amateur fights on YouTube get millions of hits a day, so we know somebody's watching them. Maybe the NHL can try to recruit these blood-thirsty viewers.

I'll admit, the NHL's campaign to grow their fan base took a hit when both the Eastern and Western Conference Finals ended in four and five games, respectively. But the Stanley Cup Final, a rematch of last year, has certainly helped make up for it.

The Red Wings host the Penguins tonight in Game 7 of the Stanley Cup Final. So if you've missed most (or all) of the playoffs this season, at least you can catch the final game of the year. But if that is in fact the case, shame on you. You don't know what you've been missing.

Hit or Miss

Over the last decade college football recruiting has practically become a sport of its own. And with millions of dollars on the line, things are more competitive than ever. Every program is looking for that stud prospect who can not only make an immediate impact, but also draw other recruits to their school.

Recruiting databases such as Rivals.com do a great job keeping fans in the know. But as far as projecting HS players to the college level, scouting is far from an exact science. These "gurus" often evaluate the very best prospects accurately - but once you get past the top of those lists, it becomes hit-or-miss.

Generally, it takes a recruiting class two years to make an impact on the field. Some kids may play immediately, while others may not touch the field for three or four years. But it's usually a two-year process.

Below I've listed the top sixteen recruiting classes -- according to Rivals.com -- from 2004 to 2006, along with each school's final Coaches Poll ranking two years later. (Note to reader: Teams finishing outside the top sixteen in the final CP are listed as not ranked or "NR")

'04 Recruiting Rankings ('06 Coaches Poll)
1. Southern Cal (4)
2. LSU (3)
3. Florida State (NR)
4. Miami (FL) (NR)
5. Michigan (9)
6. Georgia (NR)
7. Florida (1)
8. Oklahoma (11)
9. Ohio State (2)
10. Texas (13)
11. Tennessee (NR)
12. Oregon (NR)
13. Texas A&M (NR)
14. Penn State (NR)
15. Alabama (NR)
16. Michigan State (NR)

Five schools finished both the '04 recruiting season and the '06 regular season in the top ten. These five schools (Florida, Ohio State, LSU, Southern Cal and Michigan) have elite football programs. So elite, in fact, that six of the last seven BCS National Champions have been among this group.

But as I mentioned before, recruiting rankings don't always translate into on-field success. Programs such as Florida State and Miami (FL) annually rank among the best in the nation in recruiting, but have had a hard time cracking the top sixteen of the Coaches Poll in recent years.

'05 Recruiting Rankings ('07 Coaches Poll)

1. Southern Cal (2)
2. Florida State (NR)
3. Oklahoma (8)
4. Tennessee (12)
5. Nebraska (NR)
6. Michigan (NR)
7. Miami (FL) (NR)
8. Texas A&M (NR)
9. California (NR)
10. Georgia (3)
11. Iowa (NR)
12. Ohio State (4)
13. Auburn (14)
14. Virginia Tech (9)
15. Florida (16)
16. Maryland (NR)

Of the three recruiting seasons discussed here, the '05 rankings were by far the least accurate. Seven of the top ten in Rivals' rankings landed outside the top ten in the final Coaches Poll of 2007. The only three to finish in both top tens were Southern Cal, Oklahoma and Georgia, three of today's most consistently great programs.

You may have noticed that the No. 1 team from 2007, LSU, was no where to be found in Rivals' 2005 recruiting rankings, proving that the two-year theory doesn't always hold true. However, it should be noted that LSU finished 2nd in recruiting in 2004 and 7th in 2006.

'06 Recruiting Rankings ('08 Coaches Poll)
1. Southern Cal (2)
2. Florida (1)
3. Florida State (NR)
4. Georgia (10)
5. Texas (3)
6. Penn State (8)
7. LSU (NR)
8. Notre Dame (NR)
9. Oklahoma (5)
10. Auburn (NR)
11. Alabama (6)
12. Ohio State (11)
13. Michigan (NR)
14. Miami (FL) (NR)
15. Clemson (NR)
16. Ole Miss (15)

In 2008, just over half of the top sixteen in Rivals' 2006 rankings finished in the top sixteen of the 2008 Coaches Poll. And as usual, the powerhouse programs finished about the same in each while the underachievers (Florida State, Notre Dame, Miami (FL) and Clemson) continued to underachieve.

Speaking of underachievers, one of the biggest problems today when ranking recruiting classes is that programs with rich histories often get preferential treatment.

For example: Florida State finished 3rd, 2nd and 3rd, respectively, from '04-'06 in Rivals' recruiting rankings. They then went on to finish outside the top sixteen in the Coaches Poll from '06-'08. Are the Seminoles' recruiting classes put on a pedestal because of their name/reputation? Or is the FSU coaching staff not doing a good enough job? Maybe there are other factors involved.

Sometimes the inaccuracy of recruiting rankings is due to the system that a college program runs. For instance: If a school signs a quarterback that doesn't fit their offense, the "experts" will consider this a huge signing. That signing could then drastically (not to mention mistakenly) shake up recruiting rankings.

Geography may also play a role in the overhype of some prospects and the recruiting classes with which they sign. Of the 2009 Rivals 100 (the top 100 prospects according to the recruiting giant), a combined forty-one percent hailed from three states: Florida (18), Texas (12) and California (11).

Do those states produce that much more talent than, say, Indiana, New Jersey or Washington? Any recruiting "guru" will tell you that these three states -- in terms of the high school talent they produce -- are highly underrated.

But sure enough, none of the three had a player in the 2009 Rivals 100. I understand that scouts can't evaluate every HS prospect in every corner of the nation, but geographical biases can convey misleading reports.

I've followed college football recruiting closely for a handful of years. I've seen five-star prospects turn into busts and I've seen three-star prospects turn into All-Americans. So it's clear that college programs don't always know what they're getting.

But despite the unpredictable rankings, I'll continue to follow the recruiting process each year. It's good to be informed. I'll just be sure to proceed with caution.

Team of the Future

An unlikely city stole NBA headlines this season. It was home to the league's best regular season record, the Coach of the Year and the Most Valuable Player. And no, it wasn't Boston, Chicago or Los Angeles. It was Cleveland.

The Cavaliers were the only team in the league to win eighty percent of their games this season. They led the NBA in point differential. Their defense was unbreakable. They defended their home floor, going an astonishing 39-2. They were the greatest team in the NBA.

The media, as well as fans nationwide, praised the Cavs for their care-free, laid-back approach this season. But as fun as it was to watch LeBron and his loosey-goosey teammates dominate the standings, the Cavs playoff run was over sooner than you can say: O-VER-RAT-ED!

In fact, the most surprising part of their shocking playoff exit was how lopsided it was. The Orlando Magic upset the Cavs because they had more athletic, more aggressive big men. And this dominance -- led by Dwight Howard -- was the greatest factor in Orlando's 4-2 series victory in the Eastern Conference Finals. This result may have come as a surprise - but should it have?

The truth is, the Cleveland Cavaliers struggled against the league's best all season. Including the Eastern Conference Finals the Cavs were a combined 5-10 this season against the Lakers, Celtics and Magic - the teams that finished two through four in the regular season standings.

LeBron and Co. particularly struggled against the Magic. In four games at Cleveland (where the home team won three of four) the Cavs' average margin of victory was a mere three-and-a-half points. In five games at Orlando (where the home team was undefeated) the Magic's average margin of victory was thirteen, including four double-digit wins.

The scary thing for Cleveland fans, something that became quite evident after Game 1 of the Conference Finals, is that the Magic were no fluke this year. They have an All-Star point guard and the best center in the league. And they're only going to get better.

The Cleveland Cavaliers were supposed to be the Team of the Future in the Eastern Conference. Instead, it looks as though the Magic have claimed that title. If you thought, last fall, that LeBron had a tough decision to make next summer, that decision has only become more complicated.

As for the Orlando Magic, the sky's the limit. Their coach is proven, their roster is young and talented, and they now have championship experience.

Plus, if you were a free agent this offseason, where would you rather sign: Cleveland or Orlando? Better team, better weather, bigger market. What's not to like?

The Worldwide Monopolizer in Sports

I loved Nickelodeon when I was kid. That was, of course, until I discovered ESPN. And now, nearly fifteen years later, I'm a full-blown addict.

Like most sports fanatics, I rely on ESPN for about 90% of my news and information. When it comes to sports, no one does it better. Where else can we get non-stop, round-the-clock coverage of the sports that matter most to us?

From hilarious yet professional on-air personalities, to great behind-the-scenes people, very few cable networks have mastered broadcast journalism like ESPN.

And it doesn't end there. They have a diverse lineup of gifted writers and their investigative reports rival those of CNN.

But despite my praises, I also have my reservations.

Is it me, or does "Breaking News" -- that is often anything but -- lead off every SportsCenter? Contradicting rumors are constantly hogging on-air time. And every development of every rumor is tediously scrutinized. I don't know about you, but I'm turned off by exaggerated non-stories.

It's as if ESPN is constantly reaching for something to talk about. Don't false reports from "a source close to the situation" hurt ESPN's credibility?

I cringe every time I read the words "undisclosed", "anonymous" or "allegedly" on ESPN's Bottom Line. You don't need to have a degree in journalism to know that this is frowned upon throughout the industry.

People wonder why newspapers are falling and less formal multimedia outlets are rising. Traditional forms of media report cleanly, succinctly. They don't embellish. They don't create drama. They simply report the news.

ESPN has monopolized sports journalism. Sure, they've done it fair and square. But when people only tune -- or log, for that matter -- into one network, that one network can say or do whatever they please. Who's going to stop them?