Are You Really Surprised?

The worst thing about any Broncos loss is that the Tebow talk will increase exponentially the following week. As if it's even possible - that might be a quandry for the mathematics field.

Denver could have won their game Sunday v. the Tennesse Titans. They could have won if only they had managed to score on one of the four consecutive plays they ran from inside the Tennessee 2-yard line. They could have won if the defense hadn't surrendered the 58-yard pass to the tight end to set up the Titans' go-ahead touchdown. They could have won if Kyle Orton's pass hadn't been batted in the air and intercepted when the Broncos were driving with less than two minutes to go.

On the other hand, they also could have lost by more points than they did - if Kenny Britt hadn't suffered a season-ending injury and fumbled the ball away to the Broncos on the same play or if the Denver defense hadn't been so successful slowing down Chris Johnson. Some things go your way and others don't. If you play the game ten times, you'd probably get a similar result six times.

A lot of talk has focused on the Broncos' failure to punch the ball in the end zone in four tries, and whether it was the right call to go for it on fourth down instead of kicking the field goal. Some people think the situation called for a "Tebow package" because the chances of Tim Tebow scoring in that situation are roughly 98.2 percent. John Fox didn't bring in Tebow in that situation, maybe because it's a little like feeding the bears, aka Tebowmania.

They didn't score because the offensive line isn't very good. This can still be blamed on Josh McDaniels - he spent first round picks on Knowshon Moreno, Demaryius Thomas, and Tim Tebow (none of whom played against the Titans, BTW) rather than a lineman such as Steelers Pro Bowl center Maurkice Pouncey (who was available for the Broncos to take in the first round in 2010 when they had no centers on their roster at the time BTW).

While I'm in favor of Kyle Orton being the starter at QB over Tebow, I'm not sure how much longer excuses can be made for him. One of the knocks against Orton is that he isn't able to lead the Broncos to victory when they are behind in the fourth quarter. He's had two chances so far this year, and has not come through either time. Sure, it wasn't necessarily his fault on Sunday that the Titans lineman got his hand up in order to deflect the pass. But it's still true that K.O. didn't come through in crunch time.

The Broncos have the Packers and the Chargers, and some folks are saying that should they lose both, Tebow will become the starter after the October 16th bye week. I feel that's a little bit wishful thinking, and they probably won't give up on Orton that soon.

A lot of fans are already getting on John Fox and his "conservative approach". Guys, it's going to take time to fix everything. Let's practice a little patience and not fire everyone after this season. Besides, wasn't Broncomania built on good defense? I know, it's a different era, and unless you're putting up 30 points a game, something must be really wrong.

The Broncos aren't going to the playoffs this year. We already knew that. In fact, I'm looking at their schedule the rest of the season and kind of feeling like my 6-10 prediction might be kind of optimistic.

@ Packers - defending Super Bowl champs
Chargers - have dominated Broncos the past few years
@ Dolphins - seems like a win, but it is a road game
Lions - might be one of the NFL elite
@ Raiders - Broncos already lost to Oakland at home
@ Chiefs - Broncos usually don't play well in KC
Jets - might be one of the NFL elite
@ Chargers - SD probably will be in the playoff hunt
@ Vikings - potential win, but is on the road
Bears - Jay Cutler looking for revenge
Patriots - they do still have the immortal Tom Brady
@ Bills - doesn't look so much like a win anymore
Chiefs - Maybe a win

The Dolphins, Vikings, and the two Chiefs games appear the most winnable at this point. I'd expect the Broncos to win a couple that they shouldn't - the Jets or Bears, for example, but they'll probably also drop one or two that they shouldn't.

So I'm kind of sticking with 6-10.

Ill Will for CU

Let's be clear, I don't give a crap about college football anymore. If they came out tomorrow and said it was canceled for the rest of eternity I wouldn't care one bit.

That being said, what's transpiring with the superconferences has me a bit excited, specifically the notion that the Pac-12 could soon grow to the Pac-16 by adding some combination of Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas Tech, and Baylor.

The University of Colorado is unhappy with this possibility, mainly because they ditched the Big 12 to join the sexier Pac-10 just last year. They were so pleased with themselves and talked about how much better their academic mission aligned with the elite schools of the Pac-10 and how much of a better fit it was to be in California because that's where all their alumni live anyway and blah blah blah. I'm surprised they didn't pack up the whole campus and the city of Boulder and move it all out to the Pacific coast.

So the very idea of CU breaking away from their family to go off to California and court all the pretty girls, only to be joined a year later by their hayseed brethren from the Southwest, who are going to sit up to the dinner table and scrape a heaping portion of the feast off CU's plate for themselves, and then go out and take their turn with the pretty girls. . . well, it's a beautiful thing to me.

I so hope it happens. It might very well be the highlight of my 2011 sports year.

I'm not sure when or why CU started bugging me so much. All I know is they do.

Not Looking Good

Like many folks, I was encouraged by the performance of the Broncos during the preseason. I thought that maybe they could potentially have a decent year of 8-8 where they're kind of in the playoff hunt, but not really.

But before making any public statements, I wanted to first see how they did in the opening week versus Oakland - knowing how the Raiders dominated them in both matchups in 2010.

After watching the game, I have decided to revise my high water mark for the Broncos from 8 wins to 6 wins. Because it sure looked like the same Broncos from 2010, but instead of Josh McDaniels coaching it was John Fox. They couldn't run the ball or stop the run. The offensive line couldn't protect the passer, and the Broncos couldn't rush the passer. It also looked like the same Kyle Orton. The Broncos got that early fumble recovery inside the Raiders 20, and the best they could do was a field goal. And then, with a chance to rally the Broncos in the fourth quarter, he fumbles the ball away.

The worst part about all this is that it will re-ignite all the Tebow lovers. But the Broncos issues are so much deeper than the quarterback. When you spend the better part of a decade failing to develop talent on the offensive and defensive line, this is what you get. A bad football team. And there is nothing that Knowshon Moreno, Demaryius Thomas, or Tim Tebow can do to solve it.

The good news is that the Broncos should have another top 10 draft pick next year. Hopefully they will use it wisely.

If You Strike Me Down, I Shall Become More Powerful Than You Can Possibly Imagine

In case you didn't hear, little Anna did not make it through to the finals of American's Got Talent. Her performance of Cyndi Lauper's "True Colors" was admittedly a bit off, and with the judges raving about several other performances, the handwriting was on the wall as Tuesday's show wrapped up.

I held out hope that America would grade her on her whole body of work, but apparently they did not, and she was eliminated on Wednesday night from the competition.

The acts who will square off next week for the grand prize are Team iLuminate, Silhouettes, Poplyfe, and Landau Eugene Murphy Jr.

If the judges had to select a winner at their sole discretion, it's clear that they would have given it to Team iLuminate a couple of weeks ago. But since it's America voting, it will probably be the act which performs the best Tuesday night.

The double standards of the judges kind of bug me. It's not clear to me, and doesn't seem to be clear to the contestants, exactly how much they like to see the acts branch out and take risks.

In the early stages of the competition, Professor Splash wowed the judges with his bellyflops into the kiddie pool, but he was often questioned about what else he could do. When he finally did something a little different, they said it wasn't as good as the dives into the shallow pool. And he was immediately eliminated.

Sandau Trio Russian Bar ran into the same problem - in their efforts to do something different, they bombed badly, and were rightly criticized for it. Yet if they had continued doing variations on the original act, it seems likely that they would have been raked over the coals.

On Tuesday, the Miami All-Stars were criticized during the Top 10 show because Piers did not like the football/cheerleader theme of their performance, and said that he preferred the swing they had done in the semifinals.

However, minutes later, West Springfield Dance Team rolled out another edition of their unique brand of "gore-dance". Sharon seemed to think it was boring because they were expecting the same type of act. However, the similarily of their routines had never seemed to bother the judges before. I'm not sure what the judges wanted them to do - perhaps put on brightly-colored pastels and dance around with lollipops?

If I were a conspiracy theorist, I would argue that the rejection of Miami All-Stars and WSDT was simply a case of the judges making sure that the decks were cleared for their preferred dance acts - Team iLuminate and Silhouettes. Those two acts probably work a little better for a Vegas-type show - is it possible that the judges receive pressure from the producers of AGT or NBC to hype certain acts?

I bring this up because like WSDT, every act that Silhouettes has rolled out has been more or less the same - patriotic, heartstring-tugging themes - and yet the judges have been effusive in their praise every time. On Tuesday, AGT aired a manipulative human interest piece before Silhouettes went on - about many of the girls suffering from chronic illnesses, and their director not having any kids of her own, so all the dancers call her mom, and so on. It's clear they wanted them to go through Tuesday night, and America got the message.

The judges are clearly rooting for Team iLuminate to take the $1 million. I'm sure Team iLuminate could do whatever they want next on stage next Tuesday, and as long as it isn't a disaster, the judges will be ecstatic.

I guess Poplyfe is good, although they just don't connect with me for some reason. I wouldn't pay to see them - let's put it that way.

So I'm left to pull for Landau Eugene Murphy Jr. to croon his way to victory.

If you're thinking, wow, he's sounding kind of bitter and vindictive, well, I am, because my favorite just lost, and I don't care what happens to the rest of them. I'll miss her performances, which were akin to Carrie Underwood on American Idol. You didn't ever want to miss them, because they seemed like history in the making.

From the moment we heard "What a Wonderful World" nearly two months ago, it seemed that she had a blow-your-doors off quality that the other acts did not possess. And when she rolled out her version of "Home Sweet Home" a couple of weeks ago, it seemed like the momentum would be enough to carry her all the way. But I guess the demand to be ever-improving proved to be too much for a little kid, however remarkable she might be.

The good news for her, like Jennifer Hudson, is that this is just the beginning.

In case you haven't seen the show and are wondering what I'm talking about, please see my post immediately preceding this one.

What a Wonderful World