The Ultimate QB (QuarterBolek) Rating System: The Four Tiers of NFL QBs

From the moment that NFL coverage starts getting rampant on both the NFL Network and ESPN, you won't be able to watch a show that doesn't have a topic point relating to who should be considered the top quarterbacks (or the buzz word as of late, "elite") of the NFL.

Sometimes, there will be an oddball who is likely trying to create dialogue for dialogue's sake and mentions someone off the radar or someone who clearly is not a top-level quarterback. Otherwise, it's the same list, over and over. The term "best quarterback" gets overused to the point where it becomes meaningless. One moment, it's Tom Brady; the next, Peyton.

But why does it matter who is the best? The end goal is the same for all of these guys - the Lombardi Trophy. Ultimately, the best quarterbacks are the ones who will year-in, year-out always have a puncher's chance of winning a Super Bowl. History has shown that the quarterback position is where we can best judge a team's chances of winning it all. After all, most Super Bowl winners are usually Hall-of-Fame caliber. The one's usually discussed in the best conversation are indeed the ones who usually have the best chance, but a lot of times, a flavor of the week comes around to confuse some of these lists a little.

So instead of trying to constantly rank quarterbacks based on the last week's performance, we should consider there to be tiers of QBs, less flexible than the "pundit's" weekly up-and-down ranking:

• Those who have already won a Super Bowl
• Those who have the talents to win a Super Bowl but have yet to win
• Those who have slightly less talent, but could win it with the right cast of characters
• Those who would need to become a back-up later in their careers to win a title

If we break it down like this, here's how it would look, using the active list of quarterbacks. Note that in cases where the QB may not be known, I am either taking an educated guess as to who the starter will be or counting the QBs in the battle as one QB:

(1) Those who have already won a Super Bowl (listed in order by # of titles, then order of most recent title) - 7 QBs

• Tom Brady, Ben Roethlisberger, Eli Manning, Peyton Manning, Drew Brees, Aaron Rodgers, Joe Flacco
  
  Notes: Well, this list is complete fact. No opinions on whether these guys won a Super Bowl title. For now, I think these are the first of QBs that should be used when discussing who the best is, and even some of these guys shouldn't be considered (Big Ben, Flacco - not yet anyways). Anyone else mentioned is a victim of the recency effect (i.e. one of the guys below might start out the season with a hot hand).
  
  It should be noted that Peyton's only Super Bowl win was against Rex Grossman. I could only imagine the labels that would be attached to Peyton had he never won a title and thrown that pick-6 to seal the Saints' title years back. The more I look at Peyton's career, the more I see Favre - a guy with a lengthy Hall-of-Fame career who wins a title and could/should have won more but for various reasons, didn't.

(2) Those who have the talents to win a Super Bowl but have yet to win (no particular order) - 6 QBs

• Colin Kaepernick, Matt Ryan, Cam Newton, Russell Wilson, Robert Griffin III, Andrew Luck
  
  Notes: You'll notice that for the most part, these are guys who have only been in the league for a few years (with Matt Ryan being the exception). You may dispute Cam Newton being on this list, but I believe he has the talents to win a Super Bowl - he just hasn't had a chance with the Panthers defense on the other side of the ball. I am calling a playoff berth for the Cam Panthers this year.
  
  The draft class of 2012 showed itself to be the real deal. I believe all three (Luck, RG3, Wilson) will have a chance to compete in conference title game for the next decade. Who is the best of them - I have no clue yet. Who cares - let's just enjoy them without having to rank them.

(3) Those who have less talent but could win it with the right cast of characters (no particular order) - 8 QBs

•  Tony Romo, Jay Cutler, Matthew Stafford, Sam Bradford, Matt Schaub, Alex Smith, Andy Dalton, Ryan Tannehill
  
  Notes: The guys above have had wildly different paths in the NFL, a few of them young but most in the league for 6+ years, none of which has led to a Super Bowl appearance. This is the most intriguing group of QBs to me, because I do believe with the right situation, these guys can win a title. It's just that unlike the guys above, I don't think they can do it solely on the talents that they have shown.
  
  Romo - as much as I want to back him, especially with all the crap people give him, he's failed to take the next step as QB. Every year, it seems like you can pencil Dallas in for a chance to win the NFC East, only to fall flat - and no, it's not all Romo's fault as many make it out to be. But it is some of his fault.
  
  Cutler - I'm interested to see his talents used by Trestman, who has been known to be an offensive guru. For right now, he hasn't shown himself to be a guy who I think will win a title.
  
  Stafford - he seems to be more of a stat stuffer than a QB who can win a title. Problem is, he's getting paid like a Super Bowl-type QB but definitely not worth the money at this point.
  
  Bradford - this seems like it's going to be a make-or-break year for Bradford, who I could easily vault into the next category of QBs if he shows some of the talents he did while he was at Oklahoma. If he can somehow propel the Rams into the playoffs, I may consider elevating him.
  
  Schaub - he's nearing his chance of winning a title in my opinion. I'm thinking a Wade Phillips defense will need to be the catalyst, with Schaub playing a secondary role in winning a title. I don't see Schaub improving so much that I can confidently say he will not win a title by carrying the load.
  
  Smith - He had a breakout year in 2011 with the Niners and was just as effective to start 2012, but I believe Smith needs a system that suits his talents in order to succeed. KC will likely never win a Super Bowl with Smith carrying the team - they'd need a talented base around him to do it (a la Schaub).
  
  Dalton - He's about as intriguing to me as Bradford, maybe a little more so. What Dalton and A.J. Green have going is special, and I am a believer in the Bengals defense. This is my surprise team this year (I have them making it to the Super Bowl), so I will be keeping an eye on Dalton the whole year to see if he can have the big games (a la Rodgers & Brees) that will carry the Bengals to victory on days where the defense might be a little down.
  
  Tannehill - The jury is still out on him (as you could probably say on most of the 2012 draft class). I believe if he sticks with Miami long enough, he will have a shot to win some AFC East titles once Brady retires. He showed a lot more talent than many thought he would. I wouldn't be surprised if he never makes it to a AFC title game, but down the road, I wouldn't be surprised if he did.

 (4) Those who would need to become a back-up later in their careers to win a title - 11 QBs

• Michael Vick, Carson Palmer, Christian Ponder, Mark Sanchez/Geno Smith, Matt Flynn, Josh Freeman, Brandon Weeden, Philip Rivers, E.J. Manuel, Blaine Gabbert, Jake Locker
  
  Notes: Many of these guys have had their chances with their time in the league (notably Sanchez & Rivers, who have made 3 AFC title games between them - I don't see either one of them even coming close to these career achievements again, yet alone a Super Bowl as a starter). Vick, who made an NFC title game a long time ago (remember? seems so long ago) has seen his better days and is likely nearing his end as a starting QB in the next year or two. He's never shown himself to be reliable enough to win a title. Palmer has been like Stafford - a stat stuffer.
  
  Some of these first/second-year QBs, the jury is still out, although I'm just going off a hunch at this point that guys like Weeden & Manuel will never lead a team to a Super Bowl. I don't see Ponder ever leading the Vikings to the promised land (Adrian Peterson was the MVP for a reason). The others, I don't care to mention.

So there's my QB tiers. I think the third tier has the most flexibility in argument - a case can be made for many of those guys to be Super Bowl QBs and many of those, conversely, who have no chance. You may be able to convince me to lessen that third-tier list considerably.

NFL News & #BolekBestBets - NFL Week 3/NCAA Week 4

Good afternoon NFL fans and betting buddies of mine.

I'm short on time, so I will probably not give a ton of analysis - probably good for you.

Couple random NFL stories I wanted to mention:

1. Overreaction to Week 1 gives way to Overreaction to Week 2. If you live in the Chicago Bears market, you know exactly what I'm talking about. Week 1 - Bears destroy Colts and they're Super Bowl bound. Week 2 - they lose to the Packers (last I checked, the Packers are pretty damn good) and now the world is falling. This happened with a few teams (Packers, Cowboys, Giants, Broncos, etc). Odds are, your team that rotated wins and losses in Week 1 with differing performances in the games is probably not as good as their win and not as bad as their loss shows. Calm down, take a breath, and enjoy the rest of the season.
2. Too much fluff on these sports shows. The fact that I heard that Eli threw for over 500 yards, which has only happened a handful of times in history, about 1000 times less than the last play spat between the coaches is pathetic. Why is so much time spent on stuff that has little/nothing to do with the outcome? Are we so dumb as sports fans that they're catering to our supposed need for this? I'd like to think most people I know are better than this. I care about results, what happened to get to those results (i.e. stats). I don't need TMZ-style analysis entering ESPN and other sports shows.
3. If you got a ring, it don't mean a thing. Tom Brady yells at his offensive line. Peyton Manning yells at his offensive line. Aaron Rodgers yells at his offensive line. Jay Cutler yells at his offensive line. Guess who is the only one who gets critiqued for it....the guy without the ring - Jay Cutler.
   
   Peyton Manning makes a big mistake in a playoff game and throws a pick-6 to the Saints to help New Orleans seal their Super Bowl win years back. Despite having the best record in the past 7 years, Tom Brady hasn't won a Super Bowl in that time. Tony Romo fumbles a field goal snap that costs his team a chance at winning a first round playoff game. Guess who is the only one who gets critiqued for it....the guy without the ring - Tony Romo
   
   I'm not saying these guys (Romo and Cutler) shouldn't get blame for the mistakes that they make, but please have some perspective and realize that these other guys make mistakes too. If Peyton hadn't beaten the Rex Grossman-led Chicago Bears to win his lone Super Bowl, his mistake against the Saints would have been the main story of the Super Bowl, not the Saints winning their first Super Bowl.
   
   The media and general public tend to forgive the mistakes of QBs who have won Super Bowls. Keep in mind, there's only a handful of current QBs who have won a Super Bowl: Rodgers, both Mannings, Brady, Big Ben, Brees (six total QBs). Any QB not on this list who is considered good/great will eventually hear it from media/public if they fail to make the next step.
   

NCAA Week 4

K State +15
Baylor -8.5

Temple +7.5

USC -16.5

NFL Week 3

Fool's Gold Pick (0-2 so far) Oakland +4

San Fran -6.5 (falling for the trap)

NE +2 (or ML)

Cle +3

Ariz +3.5

Dal -7.5

I'm out of Survivor League for Don after picking New England like a sucker. If I was still alive today, I'd pick Dallas this week.

I don't have updated records - but for NFL, I know they're bad. I won my under bet last night, so I'm hoping I can get some betting momentum heading into the next couple weeks.

Good luck to everyone this week on bets and fantasy.

It Doesn't Matter What's Right...

...It's only wrong if you get caught.

I always come back to this Tool lyric (title + opening graf) when a story about someone blatantly bends or breaks the rules/laws which govern them. This story now applies to the New Orleans Saints, who went from a laughingstock of a franchise to one that became instantly loved and rooting on by the general public as it won its first ever Super Bowl a couple years back.

Now, they're heading back to the gutter after being found guilty of putting bounties on injuring players on opposing teams the past three seasons under the coordination of Gregg Williams. What makes it even more disgusting is that everyone in the organization (from the owner all the way through the coaching ranks of the team) knew about the program.

There's several questions that I'm wondering about in the aftermath of this:

1. What will the punishment be for this? The Patriots were fined $250K and Belichick was fined the maximum $500K for what happened with Spygate, which involved the illegal taping of NY Jets practices to pick up defensive signals. I think the maximum amount should apply to the Saints - that is if Commissioner Goodell wants to send a strong message amid the Player Safety Era of football. I'd throw in fines for the owner and the coaches, some suspensions (for coaches involved) & taking away a couple of first round picks the next couple years.
2. Who will be punished? I think Gregg Williams (the defensive coordinator at the time) will get most of the heat, but punishment should go to all parties involved. The punishment mentioned in the previous point would hold everyone responsible for the bounty fiasco.
3. Will fans hate the Saints now? Remember when everyone was rooting on the Saints a couple Februaries ago only years after a hurricane nearly decapitated their entire city? Now that this story is out there, I find it hard to believe people will have the same love for this team that they once did. Whether players were directly involved with it or not is a moot point - I could see people booing Brees much like they boo Brady, but probably not to the same extent.

Speaking of Brady, this "Bountygate" story has amazing parallels to the Spygate scandal that cannot be ignored. Some are coincidence, others are just fascinating:

1. Both stories started with underdog championship teams being cheered by America following a tragedy. It's hard to believe being so many years removed from it, but there was a point in time where people actually liked the Patriots, who were two touchdown underdogs against the St. Louis Rams, considered "The Greatest Show On Turf". It was the first Super Bowl played after 9-11, so it was only fitting that a team named "The Patriots" would be represented. They even started a trend of teams being announced as one as they ran through the tunnel as One. You know the rest - the start of the Patriots dynasty, with much of the public enjoying the huge upset.
   
   Likewise, the Saints were a couple years removed from the destruction of their hometown to Hurricane Katrina in 2005, which forced them to play at LSU's stadium for a season. Once the stadium was ready to host games again, a new man under center (Drew Brees) gave the 'Aints their first legitimate shot at success. They lost to the Bears in the 2007 NFC Championship game but took the next step three years later en route to their first Super Bowl win.
2. Both teams were knowingly breaking the rules. If you read all the quotes from Gregg Williams, he knew what he was doing was wrong, but he didn't give a crap. He only cares now BECAUSE HE GOT CAUGHT! If they never got caught, you'd never hear a peep of an "apology" from him. Belichick knew what he was doing was wrong, got caught, and thus, paid a heavy fine for it. I expect the same for the Saints.
3. Both teams were knowingly breaking rules that many other teams break.  Again, if you read quotes about both stories from football insiders (media, players, coaches), you'll know that what the Patriots and Saints did was not just isolated to their teams. They just happened to be the ones with tangible evidence against them for the league to pursue action against them. Players are tweeting about the NFL's release of this story with a collective "This happens everywhere". Similarly, Jimmy Johnson (former Cowboys coach) has been on record saying that many coaches take film on opposing team's defensive signals, making Spygate as much (or as little) of a secret as the bounty scandal.
4. Both team's head coaches had a role in the scandal.  Belichick's role may have been more pronounced, but Payton knew about the bounty system that was in place. You can't absolve blame from him just because he wasn't the person who designed the scheme - he was an accessory to an NFL crime the likes which haven't been seen since Spygate. After the Spygate scandal, much of the general public turned their once-liking of the Patriots into complete loathing, which continues to this day.
   
   The one advantage that Payton has over Belichick is the bands of media people that love him. Belichick always comes off as a hooded robot in press conferences, trying to talk up every opponent like they are the 1985 Bears; whereas Payton seems to come of as a personable guy. Perhaps this works to his advantage and he doesn't take a huge PR hit like Belichick and the Pats did.

The jury remains out on how the general public will treat the Saints story - whether they will embrace the team under the notion that "this is something every team does" or whether a chorus of boos will meet them at opposing stadiums for years to come.

I hope that fans don't give the Saints a pass for what I consider a far bigger scandal than Spygate, considering the backdrop of the NFL the past few years has centered around player safety.

I expect Goddell to lay the hammer down - now will the public?

They're Super (Bowlers), Thanks for Asking!

As the AFC & NFC Championship weekend was about to commence, I was wondering how often a mediocre quarterback has won the Super Bowl. With Alex Smith still in contention, this was a reasonable thing to research.

Smith & the 49ers lost, but that didn't stop me from researching the history of Super Bowl quarterbacks and how many of the quarterbacks were average (or at the very least, not Hall of Fame worthy).

I broke down the QBs into two different eras - Super Bowls I - XXX (1 thru 30 for the Roman Numerically-impaired) & then the rest (many players since then are not eligible for the Hall yet).

I also took a look at the Pro Football Hall of Fame to see how the QBs from the Super Bowl era are represented. I used several sites that verify starting QBs in the Super Bowl history.

Super Bowls I - XXX Era

During this time, there were only 33 different starting quarterbacks in the 30 year period (out of a possible 60). This shows that many QBs stayed dominant for extended periods of time. During this time, 4 distinct dynasties (Green Bay in 1960s, Pitt in 1970s, SF in 1980s & Dallas in early 90s) dominated the league - so the lack of QBs to appear in the big game makes sense.

18 different QBs won championships (7 QBs won multiple titles) in the first 30 Super Bowls. Out of these, 10 are in Canton, with only one QB (Jim Plunkett) that has failed to make it despite winning multiple Super Bowls. The others who won include average slingers like Jeff Hostetler & Mark Rypien. Surely not worthy of HOF-busts.

Of these champions, 21 of the 30 were won w/ a Hall of Famer behind center. I'm not going to break down the other positions, but I'd have to guess that the 70% clip that QBs have in this time frame of going to the Hall of Fame is the best of any position.

I found it strange that only three Super Bowl losers have had Hall-of-Fame QBs in this time frame: Jim Kelly (lost 4 straight), Fran Tarkenton (lost 3) & Dan Marino (lost 1).

That means that the other 22 Super Bowl losers featured a QB that was less-than-Canton-worthy. Names like Joe Kapp, Tony Eason, Stan Humphries & Neil O'Donnell are among those who could be answers to trivia questions of Super Bowl losing QBs.

Bears fans don't need me to mention Rex Grossman, but that's for another day.

Looking at this group of QBs, it makes me think that Alex Smith making a run in the playoffs and potentially making a Super Bowl wasn't as far-fetched as it seemed. Although one point is clearly proven - you may only need to be an average/above-average QB to make a Super Bowl, but you have to be a spectacular QB (HOF-worthy) to win them consistently.

In fact, only 4 QBs of the 18 who have made the Hall of Fame from the Super Bowl era did not make a single Super Bowl (Warren Moon, George Blanda, Don Fouts, Sonny Jurgeson). It definitely helps a passer's chances to go from having a passing chance of making the Hall of Fame to a legitimate one to make at least one or two Super Bowls (and preferably win one or more).

XXXI - current: More of the Same

There's been 15 Super Bowls in this timeframe, and no surprise, Hall of Fame QBs (future and potential) dominate the appearances. Particularly the AFC, who has seen a trifecta of New England, Pittsburgh & Indianapolis appear in 9 of the past 10 Super Bowls - who by no coincidence have 2 sure-bet Hall of Famers & a potential one (Big Ben being in the latter). This time span also includes John Elway's 2 titles before he retired.

While the NFC has had scattered success (the Giants are the first NFC team in the past 11 years to make 2 Super Bowls), it has still had its share of HOF or fringe-HOFers representing them. Among them: Aaron Rodgers, Drew Brees, Brett Favre & Eli Manning - all of which could make the Hall.

Obviously, like the first 30, the past 15 have seen its share of duds. I count 9 QBs of the 19 who made it in this time frame who definitely will not make it, including two winners (Trent Dilfer & Brad Johnson), 5 who will (Brady, Peyton, Favre, Rodgers, Brees) and several question marks (Eli & Big Ben among them).

If you give all of my ? mark QBs the Hall nod, that'd be 10 of 19 QBs from this era in the Hall. The other ? marks I had were for McNabb, Kurt Warner & Bledsoe, with Warner the most likely of the 3 to make the Hall in my opinion.

Compared to the 70% of Super Bowls in the first 30 to feature a Hall of Famer behind center for the champion, this current era has featured 13 of 15 titles won by HOFs or future HOFs (assuming Eli, Warner & Big Ben would make it). With Brady and Eli facing each other this year, it'll be 14 for 16; so 35 of 46 Super Bowls have been won by a HOF-caliber quarterback.

If you wonder why teams scout this position so carefully in hopes of finding the franchise savior, the above stat is why. Getting the right guy behind center, even if it's just for one championship, can be the difference between the Colts building Lucas Oil Stadium & being in Los Angeles right now if they would have drafted Ryan Leaf instead of Peyton.
As far as the QB category of those who have not made a Super Bowl making it to the Hall in this current era, only Tony Romo comes close to that designation at this point, and if you read the blog I just posted, you'd have to imagine he'd have to make a Super Bowl (and probably win it) to get consideration.

XLVI Prediction

With this being the last football blog before the big game, I am being paid by unnamed sources to provide my Super Bowl pick.

Much of the public is on the Giants, as they have hit their stride since their Week 15 loss to the Redskins. Meanwhile, the Patriots have put together the quietest 10 game winning streak ever.  Their bend-but-don't-break defense will be tested by the aerial attack led by Eli Manning, who has greatly benefited from the emergence of Victor Cruz as a top-notch target.

A lot of focus is on the Gronkowski injury, which I believe has gotten a little too much press. Brady has won with crappy receivers before - he wins with subpar receivers better than anyone. And before you say Welker is awesome - I'm in the camp that Brady has made Welker good. His stats broken down:

Pre-New England: 96 catches, 1121 yards, 1 TD in 2 seasons as a receiver with Miami
New England: 111 catches, 1221 yards, 6 TDs AS AN AVERAGE SEASON in 5 years w/ NE

Brady may be the one great QB who doesn't get enough credit for what he has done with such little talent at wide receiver. The only great WR he ever had was Randy Moss, and look what happened the full year that they played with each other. Welker and Hernandez would be sufficient enough of targets for Brady but it looks like Gronk is going to play, which is fantastic for New England.

With how much pressure the Niners got on the Giants line a few weeks ago, I'm surprised that the NE defensive line isn't getting as much attention in the press, particularly Wilfork. I think the Pats will be able to get decent pressure on Eli enough to rattle him.

I'm going Patriots 31-20 (so I'm likely betting Pats -2.5 or 3 and the under of 54).

Good luck to anyone betting this game or anyone who is rooting for either of these teams outside of gambling (you know, that whole fandom thing).

I know my girlfriend is counting down the minutes until football is over and smiling thinking about it, while I'm on the verge of tears as another season ends.

Hey, at least there will be Thursday Night Football almost every week next year!

Judging Today's Crop of QBs (not named Tom or Peyton) & chances for HOF

I decided to break down the current worthy QBs in terms of their chances of making the Hall of Fame. I'm currently working on another piece which shows that there is a correlation between making/winning Super Bowls & making the Hall of Fame as a QB.

I decided to analyze a few QBs that are at or near the elite level and have played for the better part of the past decade that may have some level of debate on whether they are in the Hall of Fame. Brady and Peyton excluded for obvious Canton busts already being built for them.

Sorry, no Alex Smith or Rex Grossman. I hope you can make it through.

Eli Manning

The current matchup, a rematch of 4 years ago, features one QB who will definitely be a Hall of Famer in Tom Brady versus a likely one in Eli Manning. Some ask - does Eli have to win this to make the Hall of Fame?

Short answer: no. Longer answer - if he continues to lead his team to playoff successes every so often(and I'd argue they've succeeded this season regardless of outcome on Sunday), I have no doubt he will be a Hall of Famer.

Everyone seems to want to compare Eli to his brother as if to minimize what the younger brother has accomplished so far. Critics say that Eli benefited from a once-in-a-lifetime catch by David Tyree & a stellar defense. To those critics, I raise you an overachieving Bears team headed by Rex Grossman as the one and only team that Peyton has beaten to win a ring.

I know Eli is not as good as Peyton at this point, but who the hell is?

Current HOF verdict: IN

Drew Brees

Brees has been a crucial part in not only building the Saints into a perennial contender, but also providing the city of New Orleans a much needed shot in the arm for morale purposes. He has led the Saints to 2 NFC Championship Games, winning a Super Bowl a few years ago. He fits the mold of what is expected from a Hall of Fame QB.

Current HOF verdict: IN

Aaron Rodgers

Rodgers is well on his way to making his way to Canton. In what will likely be recognized as an MVP season despite the playoff failure, he will be adding to the accolades that include Super Bowl MVP for his performance last year in beating the Steelers. As long as he continues this career arc and doesn't get hurt for an extended period of time, I like his chances of not only making the Hall of Fame, but also winning another ring or two before his career is done.

Current HOF verdict: pending (likely in)

Ben Roethlisberger

Big Ben has made quite a name for himself on and off the field since he joined the Steelers in 2004 for good and bad reasons. I don't think the incidents he has had will hurt his chances of making the Hall of Fame. I'm not sure what to make of his chances though. Does he have the credentials of a Hall of Fame QB? Does he seem like a Hall of Fame QB? I'd say yes (3 SB appearances, 2 wins) and....I'm not sure. If he does make it, I don't think he'll make it first ballot.

Current HOF verdict: Leaning IN

Tony Romo

There's no questioning the numbers that Romo has put up in his career have been stellar. You could win a lot of bets from people if you wagered that Romo has a better career passer rating than every QB in NFL history but Aaron Rodgers among qualifying QBs (according to Pro Football Reference). However, there is a huuuuuuuuge void in his resume, one that will forever haunt his public image (ie - ESPN junkies) and probably voters as well. The 1000 lb gorilla in the room of no playoff success, particularly not making at least one Super Bowl to this point, will likely keep him out of Canton if it doesn't change. I know my Cowboys friends can tell you that it hasn't always been his fault with the Cowboy collapses, but until Dallas has moderate playoff success, these ghosts will haunt his chances (fair or not).

Current HOF verdict: OUT

Philip Rivers

See above critique of Romo. OUT.

Bye to the Hiatus: Sports Talk about Santo, Marlin$, Te-Pro Bowl

I've had writer's block, haven't really sat down by my computer after work, etc., so I apologize to the 10 of you who read my blog regularly.

And by apologize, I mean I'm not really sorry and you should write for me on my writing hiatuses.

Anywho, lots of sports stuff - might write a few blogs tonight. For now, a bulleted one.

As they always say, you're always more famous when you're dead...Ron Santo in the Hall of Fame, finally.

Welcome to the Hall, Ron. Too bad you weren't around to answer the call.

For years, Santo and his loyal fanbase lobbied for his induction into the Hall of Fame by the Veteran's Committee, which passed him over with each vote. It took the Golden Era Committee (which reviews players from 1947-1972 that have been left out of the Hall) to vote him in. A couple of points from this and the Hall of Fame in general:

1. Good for him, but why did he get voted in a year after he died? Did it take his death to get voted in?
2. The Hall of Fame shouldn't be easy to get into. It should be a selective process and reward only the game's best.
3. Santo didn't get voted into the Hall by the regular voters mainly because of the influx of guys voted into the hall during his 15 year eligibility span (over half of the time he was eligible, 4+ guys got voted in by regular committee).
4. The Hall voters are dumb. Only thing you need to know, no one, not even Babe Ruth or Ted Williams, has ever been voted in unanimously. Voters who leave certain guys off their ballots should have their vote taken away. Next example of this - Greg Maddux.
5. How can voters not vote for someone one year, then next year change their ballot to include said player(s)? Player's stats (aside from Hack Wilson's) haven't changed after they retired, so it makes no sense to leave a guy off of a ballot if you think he is a HOF. Either you think he is HOF-worthy or he is not. It shouldn't be a year-to-year thing where as a voter, you change your mind and say, you know what, he is worthy now.

The Miami Marlins have been bought by the ghost of George Steinbrenner.  First Reyes, now Buehrle. Next, Pujols? Marlins are spending like the Yankees right now. Last year, they were lucky to draw a thousand people to some games. They have a new stadium that they are looking to fill now. My guess is that it will be like the previous stadiums that opened - fun at first, but at the end of the day, people won't show up day in, day out for a losing product. The Reyes contract is going to look awful in  a few years, and if they sign Pujols, that'll make two contracts that look ugly come 2015. Reyes' game is based on speed, and with how often he gets hurt, I don't expect him to be getting within a whiff of his steal totals from the first half of his career. I consider him a bum for taking himself out of the last regular season game when he ensured himself of winning the batting title. This doesn't sound like a guy I'd want around my team.

Pujols has had 3-4 years in declining stats and is going to be an average to slightly above-average player in about 4-5 years, which means 5-6 years of dead money. Also, we assume he is 31 right now. With how often Dominicans who come to the major leagues have fudged their age, what if he is 33 right now? That would mean he would be 42-43 when this deal ends. Like I said a few weeks ago, the Cards should let the Marlins sign him. The Cardinals do not need him to contend in a weak NL Central now. And with the solid foundation of ownership that they've always had, they won't need him in the near future.

Tebow a Pro-Bowler? Not as crazy of a thought as you might think.

Never thought I'd be saying this, but I'd be surprised if Tebow WASN'T a Pro-Bowler this year. Before you think I've swallowed a couple of crazy pills and smoked a pipe, look at the AFC and look at the talent of the QBs this year by division. And by no means am I a believer in his long-term success, merely looking at this year's QB situations in the AFC. (Note: I've named the starter to be the guy who has started the most game for his team at this point):

AFC North: Big Ben, Flacco, McCoy, Dalton: Only one who will make Pro Bowl (at least initially) will be Big Ben.
AFC South: Schaub, Painter, Hasselbeck, Gabbert: No Pro-Bowlers here. Schaub, who would have made it, is out for year.
AFC East: Brady, Sanchez, Fitzpatrick, Moore: Brady will go. Sanchez is under-rated and gets too much criticism, don't see him getting in. Fitzpatrick is a sleeper for nomination. If Moore could have started the year, he may be more considered (and Miami may be a playoff team).
AFC West: Tebow, Palmer, Rivers, Cassel: Again, no one here deserves nomination. Rivers is having a down year, Palmer is still getting his feet wet.

Will get in: Brady, Big Ben
Could get in: Flacco, Dalton, Fitzpatrick, Tebow
Probably won't: Rivers, Hasselbeck, Sanchez
Won't get in: Everyone else

As you can see by a breakdown, it's not too crazy to think that the Tebow hype gets him in the Pro Bowl, even though his stats don't show it. The fans get a third of the vote, remember. Also remember that Big Ben and Brady will likely bail on the Pro Bowl (playoff status or not) and there will be replacement(s) for them.

Also remember that the Pro Bowl is a useless game that no one really cares about or watches anyways, and the arguments over who doesn't get in are as pointless as the arguments about the fringe teams who don't make the NCAA tourney.

The BCS got the final game right, but there should at least be a +1 scenario in place. Just about everyone who watches college football has something bad to say about the BCS, and most believe there should be some kind of playoff. I know some people who believe a team should win their conference (whether it have a title game or not) in order to be considered. Others don't like the idea of a rematch in the title game - I have no problem with one.

However, I do think that there should be some mini-playoff, like a +1 scenario, which I understand to be a four-team playoff, with winners of semi-final games to play in championship game. In years where there are less than two major conference teams that finish undefeated, the BCS process gets critiqued. Last year, Oregon and Auburn finished undefeated, so no problems there. This year? LSU and then a bunch of 1-loss teams.

I think Bama and OK St should play each other in a couple weeks to play for the right to play LSU in champ game. Either way, I think it'd end up being Bama/LSU for the title.

Tom Brady is Sexy, Other NFL Observations & Week 3 Thoughts

Another week in the books, another week on the horizon. Some thoughts came from my Week 2 observations:

The Best D in New England is BraDy

New England's strong offensive start (36.5 points/game) has helped mask what definitely isn't one of the strong defenses that we are used to from the New England dynasty. There's no questioning Brady's awesomeness, and he's clearly the best weapon there is in the NFL. I'd worry about NE's chances to win it all if I were the Patriots though. As the Jets showed in the playoffs last year, if you make Brady look average, the Pats don't have the defense they once did to carry them to the next level. For now, I'm sticking with my Packers pick.

QBs should wear flags

The late hits being called on QBs is nothing new, but through the first two weeks, some of these calls are borderline ridiculous at best and shows me that the NFL should just take the next logical step that they are going with this pampering of QBs and put flags on them.  That way, at least you could justify all the flags that always end up surrounding the quarterback on a weekly basis.

The constant flags make it impossible for defensive players to do what they were taught to do their entire careers - hit people.

Cam Newton - Too Much Love

I'm not saying he doesn't deserve some love, but all these media outlets are doing their best Katie Morgan impressions on Cam right now. I'm impressed with his completion rate (62.7%) but I won't be on board with him until he cuts back on interceptions (4 so far). Obviously, the season is young AND he is a rookie - so there is clearly room for improvement. I do think he will be a Pro Bowl-caliber quarterback throughout his career. But remember, his team is 0-2 and in his case (unlike Brady's), averaging 400+ yards a game is probably not gonna be the formula that wins them games.

Tony Romo - Too Much Hate

I bet you didn't know this stat about Romo - he has the league's highest passer rating in the 4th quarter since 2006 (source: check it here - first posted on ESPN). You'd never know based on the media's non-Cam Newton love for Romo. Much like LeBron, Romo's personality rubs people the wrong way and seems to bring on the majority of his haters.

While Romo only has 1 playoff win (to 3 losses in the 4 pro seasons that he ended the season as starter - last year not included), he has the same number of Super Bowl wins as Philip Rivers, Michael Vick and Matt Ryan - who are three of the QBs considered to be among the elite of QBs in the NFL. Yet, you never hear about their inability to win in the playoffs or the big game - Rivers (3-4 record in 5 years of starting), Vick (2-3), Ryan (0-2 in 3 seasons).

I mention Super Bowl because that's what seems to be the only way people look at Romo's success. I think he is a top-10 quarterback in the league, but don't think he's top 5. Thus, I think people should stop looking at his career as a failure because of this.

I'll take him any day of the week on the Niners, especially with the guts he had to return against San Fran in Week 2 with his injured ribs and lungs.

Fools Gold

Last week: Tennessee easily covered the +6 against Baltimore; YTD: 2-0
(A quick explanation: Fools Gold is a game I highlight every week where a pointspread doesn't seem right and look to figure out why. In many cases, I will often bet against the bet that the general betting public will make)

Fools Gold Play of the Week: Arizona -3.5 at Seattle - Seattle couldn't have looked any more turdish in their back-to-back defeats to start the year against San Fran and Pittsburgh. Their offense has been offensive, and if they were playing any other team other than San Fran in Week 1, they would have lost that game by 24+. San Fran let Seattle stay in that game and only pulled away late because of Ted Ginn's returns.

Meanwhile, Arizona has played a few games down to the wire, holding on against Carolina before losing late in the game against the surprising 2-0 Redskins. Based on how each team has played, you'd think the line would be closer to Ariz -5 or 6 at least, but Seattle (no matter their personnel) plays well at home. The 12th man will get behind Seattle in their first home game of the season (and first home game since the upset against New Orleans last year) and Seattle wins an ugly game. Likely betting: Seattle +3.5

NFL Bets Last Week: 5-1-2, +$175 (Twitter shows my gambling updates the best - didn't bet KC last week, so check that out if interested @brianbolek)
YTD: 8-6-3 (lots of pushes this year so far, had none all of last year), -$6

More Week 3 picks:

Cin -3 (+105) vs. SF - already locked in. I see the Bengals winning this by a couple scores. They nearly pulled off the impressive feat of winning 2 road games to start the season despite low expectations. AJ Green has a performance that is a step below from Austin's the week before and Cincy wins by a couple scores.
NO -4 vs. Hou - Houston's first test this year. New Orleans' defense got back on track with a half dozen sacks of Cutler and will carry it over to this game. NO by 10. I think this one will be lower scoring than most people - might play the under as well.
KC +14.5 at SD - This is more of a system play than anything. Historically, teams who come off of two games where they get blown out will often cover in the third game. I don't have exact records, but just know this from gambling all these years and reading forums on the topic. Hoping to catch this around 15 or 15.5 but will be happy with 14.5.

Leans: Indy +10, Wash +5.5, Cle -2.5, Oak +3.5

Survivor pool pick for Week 3: Philadelphia (sticking with the home team system after considering New England)

Other picks will emerge from the heap of games I'm sure - likely some of the leans. To follow those, check out my twitter at www.twitter.com/brianbolek or in twitter-speak, @brianbolek.

Good luck to everyone's teams (fantasy, gambling and especially REAL teams!)