I filled out my office bracket the night before it was due. I had Missouri going all the way to the championship. I slept on it, and then decided that was stupid. So I switched the pick to Memphis and put Memphis all the way to the championship. I felt pretty good about my decision, especially after listening to everyone heap praise upon Memphis for a solid week. So imagine my dismay when Missouri whipped Memphis the other night. Paired with my bad Wake Forest pick, the left side (Midwest/West) of my bracket is now officially done. However, I'm still in good shape on the right (East/South), having picked all four of the final 8 teams on that side correctly.
The real star of the show, however, is Elizabeth, who had kind of a mediocre bracket for the first two rounds but then successfully picked 7 of the final 8 teams. Maybe next year I will have her fill out my office bracket. . .
Moral of the story - sleeping on it doesn't help when it comes to filling out brackets.
Saturday, March 28, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Second Round
I did pretty well on my bracket for the second round: 13-of-16 in both brackets. Sounds impressive, until you consider that if you had gone with a lazy approach and simply filled out your brackets according to seed, you would have gone 14-of-16 in the second round. All 13 of my correct 13 picks were seeded to reach the second week of the tournament.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
Brackets Take a Hit. . .
Not a real stellar first round for me. I was 22-of-32 on my home bracket and 21-of-32 on my office bracket. The big hit came on my office bracket, where I picked Wake Forest to the Final Four. Nice work, Demon Deacs. At least I wasn't like my co-worker who picked Wake to go all the way. . .
Friday, March 20, 2009
Picks. . .
On day one of the tournament, I went 11-for-16 on both of my brackets - one home, one work. Not bad, not bad. I didn't lose any of my Final Four teams, so I'm still in good shape.
So far today, I'm 3-for-3 on my office bracket, so I'm feeling pretty good. . .
So far today, I'm 3-for-3 on my office bracket, so I'm feeling pretty good. . .
Thursday, March 19, 2009
I Knew I Shouldn't Have Done it. . . But I Did
On my bracket, I put BYU down to win their first-round matchup with Texas A&M. I knew it was the wrong choice. I even looked it up - BYU hasn't won a NCAA tournament game since 1993. They've lost in the first round in each of their last six appearances.
But I figured, hey, I went to school there, and they've got to win one of these years, right? Besides, isn't Texas A&M a football school.
Make that seven straight first-round NCAA tournament exits , after Texas A&M easily beat them 79-66 today.
But I figured, hey, I went to school there, and they've got to win one of these years, right? Besides, isn't Texas A&M a football school.
Make that seven straight first-round NCAA tournament exits , after Texas A&M easily beat them 79-66 today.
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Counterpoint: Jay Cutler
On the other hand, if he is going to be a jerk about the whole thing, the Broncos should go ahead and trade his sloppy mop head so he can be Captain Grumpy Pants somewhere else. I say if they can get a mid-first round pick for him, do the deal. I can live with Jeff Garcia or Chris Simms as the quarterback for now - it's not like the Broncos were going to the playoffs next year anyways.
Meanwhile, in the far reaches of Idaho, in between handball matches and making out with his ex-Broncos cheerleader wife, Jake Plummer has to be laughing his head off.
Meanwhile, in the far reaches of Idaho, in between handball matches and making out with his ex-Broncos cheerleader wife, Jake Plummer has to be laughing his head off.
Sunday, March 8, 2009
Jay Cutler: What Do I Think?
Maybe local sports media people got together and paid someone to start this trade rumor and the resulting Jay Cutler/Josh McDaniels tiff. Because it sure has given them something to talk about all week. And I do mean ALL week.
The question about weather the alleged trade would have been a good one can be resolved by a simple six month test. As in, six months ago (September 2008), would the Broncos have traded Jay Cutler for Matt Cassel?
The answer, of course, is no. No, no, and double no. No way.
So what changed in six months? Matt Cassel played pretty decently during the second half of the season as the quarterback of a team that played in four Super Bowls in seven years - but did not make the playoffs. And then his mentor, Josh McDaniels, was hired as Broncos coach and apparently decided Cassel would continue to prosper under his tutelage.
We can also answer the question by applying another test - which I call the Bubby Brister test. As you might remember, John Elway missed several games during the 1998 season - the year of the Broncos' second Super Bowl triumph. Bubby Brister stepped in and looked pretty good as the quarterback for a few weeks - in fact, he went 4-0 as a starter.
He did so well that he became the starter after Elway retired - up until it was time for the first regular season game, when Mike Shanahan woke up and said, "Wait a minute, this is the same Bubby Brister who used to be a mediocre QB for the Steelers! I've been tricked! Give me Brian Griese!" I predict a similar fate for the KC Chiefs. One day they'll realize - "Hey! This is the same Matt Cassel who didn't even start in college! You've tricked us, Bill Belichick!"
I would also like to apply the gift horse test - as in the gift horse of the 2006 draft. Cutler was the third QB taken - Vince Young and Matt Leinart didn't even start for their teams last year. So it's not that easy to find a Pro Bowl quarterback - they sort of lucked out to get Cutler in the first place.
And last of all, let us apply the John Elway test. I've been following the Broncos since 1984, so I remember back when Elway was the same age. He was immature, he made a lot of mistakes, he threw a lot of interceptions, and everyone wondered if he would ever realize his potential. A lot of Broncos fans don't have a memory that goes back before 1997, though. They think Elway won 16 Super Bowls in 16 seasons, I think. But there were the 14 years of frustration and failure.
So, no, I don't think trading Jay Cutler is a real good idea. But I also didn't think hiring Josh McDaniels as head coach was a real good idea, either.
The question about weather the alleged trade would have been a good one can be resolved by a simple six month test. As in, six months ago (September 2008), would the Broncos have traded Jay Cutler for Matt Cassel?
The answer, of course, is no. No, no, and double no. No way.
So what changed in six months? Matt Cassel played pretty decently during the second half of the season as the quarterback of a team that played in four Super Bowls in seven years - but did not make the playoffs. And then his mentor, Josh McDaniels, was hired as Broncos coach and apparently decided Cassel would continue to prosper under his tutelage.
We can also answer the question by applying another test - which I call the Bubby Brister test. As you might remember, John Elway missed several games during the 1998 season - the year of the Broncos' second Super Bowl triumph. Bubby Brister stepped in and looked pretty good as the quarterback for a few weeks - in fact, he went 4-0 as a starter.
He did so well that he became the starter after Elway retired - up until it was time for the first regular season game, when Mike Shanahan woke up and said, "Wait a minute, this is the same Bubby Brister who used to be a mediocre QB for the Steelers! I've been tricked! Give me Brian Griese!" I predict a similar fate for the KC Chiefs. One day they'll realize - "Hey! This is the same Matt Cassel who didn't even start in college! You've tricked us, Bill Belichick!"
I would also like to apply the gift horse test - as in the gift horse of the 2006 draft. Cutler was the third QB taken - Vince Young and Matt Leinart didn't even start for their teams last year. So it's not that easy to find a Pro Bowl quarterback - they sort of lucked out to get Cutler in the first place.
And last of all, let us apply the John Elway test. I've been following the Broncos since 1984, so I remember back when Elway was the same age. He was immature, he made a lot of mistakes, he threw a lot of interceptions, and everyone wondered if he would ever realize his potential. A lot of Broncos fans don't have a memory that goes back before 1997, though. They think Elway won 16 Super Bowls in 16 seasons, I think. But there were the 14 years of frustration and failure.
So, no, I don't think trading Jay Cutler is a real good idea. But I also didn't think hiring Josh McDaniels as head coach was a real good idea, either.
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
Armchair Quarterback/Coach/General Manager/Owner
I don't work in professional football. But sometimes I wonder what the guys who do are thinking. Usually, my thought is, "Well, they are the one with the expertise, so I guess they know what they are doing."
A few examples of times when I have had that thought, as pertaining to the hometown Denver Broncos:
2001 - The Broncos spent their #1 pick on Willie Middlebrooks, a defensive back from Minnesota. A read of his profile was rather underwhelming, so one was left to wonder what exactly they were thinking. And as it turned out, he did not have much of a pro career.
2006 - The Broncos are on their way to a fourth consecutive playoff appearance when Mike Shanahan benches Jake Plummer in favor of rookie QB Jay Cutler. The Broncos win only 2 of their final 5 games, miss the playoffs, and don't appear to be on the verge of returning anytime soon. Trading a playoff bid in order to break in a rookie QB made no sense to me.
2007 - The Broncos trade up in the first round of the draft to select a skinny defensive end named Jarvis Moss. I thought that selecting him was fine, but trading up for a player who was a little bit of a "project" as a 245 pound defensive lineman? A little bit puzzling. If you're trading up, I think the guy needs to be pretty solid. And after two seasons, Moss has produced almost nothing. Additionally, the Broncos traded a couple more picks later on to get Marcus Thomas in the fourth round. At least he is a starter, but still - they only got four players out of the 2007 draft and that probably has at least a little to do with why they haven't been very good.
2009 - I was okay with the Broncos canning Mike Shanahan. It was probably time to part company. But I admit that my initial reaction to the hiring of Josh McDaniel as head coach was "Oh, no, not him." He was way down my list of the prospective coaches. Like, at the bottom. But I figured that Pat Bowlen must have seen something in the guy - after all, I was not invited to sit in on the interviews, so what do I know? Time will tell how McDaniel will work out as the head coach.
My feeling is that maybe he makes it three years. The Broncos are so bad on defense that no one should be allowed to even say the words "Super Bowl" around here before the calendar turns to 2011. And I see that they are doing the same old yearly defensive patch-up that they always do - this time starring Brian Dawkins as the aging Pro Bowl safety who energizes the fans until they realize that time travel isn't possible. And Joshie Mac will probably have to rebuild the offense at the same time he is rebuilding the defense, since Brandon Marshall can't keep his nose clean (and people wonder how Denver managed to get him in the 4th round of the draft) and the starting QB is now alienated because Joshie Mac tried to trade him and then lied about it. Fun times!
A few examples of times when I have had that thought, as pertaining to the hometown Denver Broncos:
2001 - The Broncos spent their #1 pick on Willie Middlebrooks, a defensive back from Minnesota. A read of his profile was rather underwhelming, so one was left to wonder what exactly they were thinking. And as it turned out, he did not have much of a pro career.
2006 - The Broncos are on their way to a fourth consecutive playoff appearance when Mike Shanahan benches Jake Plummer in favor of rookie QB Jay Cutler. The Broncos win only 2 of their final 5 games, miss the playoffs, and don't appear to be on the verge of returning anytime soon. Trading a playoff bid in order to break in a rookie QB made no sense to me.
2007 - The Broncos trade up in the first round of the draft to select a skinny defensive end named Jarvis Moss. I thought that selecting him was fine, but trading up for a player who was a little bit of a "project" as a 245 pound defensive lineman? A little bit puzzling. If you're trading up, I think the guy needs to be pretty solid. And after two seasons, Moss has produced almost nothing. Additionally, the Broncos traded a couple more picks later on to get Marcus Thomas in the fourth round. At least he is a starter, but still - they only got four players out of the 2007 draft and that probably has at least a little to do with why they haven't been very good.
2009 - I was okay with the Broncos canning Mike Shanahan. It was probably time to part company. But I admit that my initial reaction to the hiring of Josh McDaniel as head coach was "Oh, no, not him." He was way down my list of the prospective coaches. Like, at the bottom. But I figured that Pat Bowlen must have seen something in the guy - after all, I was not invited to sit in on the interviews, so what do I know? Time will tell how McDaniel will work out as the head coach.
My feeling is that maybe he makes it three years. The Broncos are so bad on defense that no one should be allowed to even say the words "Super Bowl" around here before the calendar turns to 2011. And I see that they are doing the same old yearly defensive patch-up that they always do - this time starring Brian Dawkins as the aging Pro Bowl safety who energizes the fans until they realize that time travel isn't possible. And Joshie Mac will probably have to rebuild the offense at the same time he is rebuilding the defense, since Brandon Marshall can't keep his nose clean (and people wonder how Denver managed to get him in the 4th round of the draft) and the starting QB is now alienated because Joshie Mac tried to trade him and then lied about it. Fun times!
Sunday, March 1, 2009
Rocky is Dead
Shock of shocks, The Rocky Mountain News published its final edition on Friday. No one saw that coming!
I'm a little bit glad for selfish reasons. As a subscriber to The Denver Post, I will no longer have the Rocky foisted upon me Saturday morning because that is what was dictated by the two papers' joint operating agreement. I can now get the Post every day, which is what I paid for.
A lot of people are upset by the demise of the Rocky. And that's fine, but I never really developed an attachment to it. Growing up, if I ever read a Denver paper, it was usually the Post. The Rocky was more of a novelty - sometimes it was fun to read one because of the wacky tabloid format.
Other people are gleeful that the Rocky is done and desperately want to see the Post die as well - because they are both worthless liberal rags. I don't completely understand that perspective - I guess because I almost never read the editorials. I don't "take the paper" so I can get informed about world and national news.
My #1 reason for "taking the paper" is the sports section. Another reason I prefer the Post is that its sports page is, in my opinion, far superior to the one found in the Rocky. Unless you're into big-city prep sports, which I'm kinda not. On Sunday, I'll generally read the sports first and then the business section. I'll probably look through the Denver & The West section as well. Sometimes there might be an interesting article in the front section - but generally that is filled with furniture and mattress ads anyways.
I guess my main point is that I'll still keep taking the paper despite the political views of whoever prints it. I like walking out to get the paper in the morning, even if I only have 5 or 10 minutes at breakfast to glance through it. I don't like reading news on the computer that much unless I'm bored at work (which I haven't been and won't be for another couple of months). So I hope they don't die off completely.
I'm a little bit glad for selfish reasons. As a subscriber to The Denver Post, I will no longer have the Rocky foisted upon me Saturday morning because that is what was dictated by the two papers' joint operating agreement. I can now get the Post every day, which is what I paid for.
A lot of people are upset by the demise of the Rocky. And that's fine, but I never really developed an attachment to it. Growing up, if I ever read a Denver paper, it was usually the Post. The Rocky was more of a novelty - sometimes it was fun to read one because of the wacky tabloid format.
Other people are gleeful that the Rocky is done and desperately want to see the Post die as well - because they are both worthless liberal rags. I don't completely understand that perspective - I guess because I almost never read the editorials. I don't "take the paper" so I can get informed about world and national news.
My #1 reason for "taking the paper" is the sports section. Another reason I prefer the Post is that its sports page is, in my opinion, far superior to the one found in the Rocky. Unless you're into big-city prep sports, which I'm kinda not. On Sunday, I'll generally read the sports first and then the business section. I'll probably look through the Denver & The West section as well. Sometimes there might be an interesting article in the front section - but generally that is filled with furniture and mattress ads anyways.
I guess my main point is that I'll still keep taking the paper despite the political views of whoever prints it. I like walking out to get the paper in the morning, even if I only have 5 or 10 minutes at breakfast to glance through it. I don't like reading news on the computer that much unless I'm bored at work (which I haven't been and won't be for another couple of months). So I hope they don't die off completely.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)