Guts, Experts or Vegas?

Picking sports games seems like it's more of an art than a science.  Our modern day oracles fill the airwaves and cyberspace try to consistently predict the future for how each game will turn out using stats, insider access and who knows what else.  Given that this is the night of the official kickoff of the NFL season - I think it's fitting to use this as test for art v science.  The NFL is a league built on parity and equality like none other and I wonder if Paul could do as well in this league as European football when it comes to picking winners.  My goal is to track picks each week based on the following four methods:

• My own intuition and experience that has been honed from years of sports dedication
• ESPN Power Rankings for week one where I pick the higher ranked team according to the ESPN "experts"
• Vegas odds for week one games
• My wife's picks - based on her intuition and experience that has been honed from years of watching Law & Order, Gilmore Girls and yelling at Tony Romo

I'm hoping I can do better than the experts - but if Starr wins out this season - I'm taking her to Vegas.  As for week one - games with varying picks are highlighted below in blue.

Game	My Pick	Power Ranking	Odds	Starr
Ravens v Broncos	Broncos	Broncos	Broncos	Broncos
Patriots v Bills	Patriots	Patriots	Patriots	Patriots
Titans v Steelers	Steelers	Steelers	Steelers	Steelers
Falcons v Saints	Saints	Falcons	Saints	Saints
Buccaneers v Jets	Buccaneers	Buccaneers	Buccaneers	Jets
Chiefs v Jaguars	Chiefs	Chiefs	Chiefs	Chiefs
Seahawks v Panthers	Seahawks	Seahawks	Seahawks	Seahawks
Bengals v Bears	Bengals	Bengals	Bears	Bengals
Dolphins v Browns	Dolphins	Dolphins	Dolphins	Browns
Vikings v Lions	Lions	Vikings	Lions	Vikings
Raiders v Colts	Colts	Colts	Colts	Colts
Packers v 49ers	49ers	49ers	49ers	Packers
Cardinals v Rams	Rams	Rams	Rams	Rams
Giants v Cowboys	Cowboys	Giants	Cowboys	Giants
Eagles v Redskins	Redskins	Redskins	Redskins	Redskins
Texans v Chargers	Texans	Texas	Texans	Texans

Super Sunday

A big football game took place Sunday.

Liverpool defeated Chelsea at Anfield behind an eleventh hour brace from Fernando Torres (the man who led Spain past Germany in last year's Euro 2008 final to crown the Iberians as Europe's finest. I'll remind everyone that Italy are still campioni del mondo until South Africa next year.)

The Spaniard's first goal came in the 89th minute, and his double was completed just a blink of the eye later in the 90th. Today's match also saw Chelsea's Frank Lampard sent off with a straight red card following a dangerous tackle. The home victory keeps Liverpool breathing down the neck of holders Manchester United, just two points ahead.

Oh, and there's another big football game stateside in Florida, with Pittsburgh taking on the debutantes from Arizona. I'm picking the Steelers to win, but the Cardinals to cover the 6.5 points.

Avoiding Downfall in South Bend

Since the Irish are traveling to Seattle to take on the Vicious Animals, it's the time of year to play the "what if" game.  What if Notre Dame had kept Ty Willingham around to give him a fair shake to stay as coach longer than three years?  What if the Irish football team was allowed to go through a full cycle of Willingham recruiting classes?  I think it's pretty clear what would have been the outcome - the total dismantling of Notre Dame football.

Willingham apologists like to point out that he was 21-15 at Notre Dame through three seasons.  He was also National Coach of the year in 2002 after somehow leading the team to an 8-0 start (which was followed by the nightmare at home against BC and a drubbing on the road against USC).  What his supporters don't seem to quickly point out is that he lead Notre Dame through five blowout losses of 30 points or more, had an offense consistently ranked towards the bottom of 1-A (now FBS) schools, and his last two recruiting classes following his "standout year" ranked 32nd and 40th respectively.

Now let's look at Willingham at Washington to see where Notre Dame could have been headed.  Washington is 11-30 under Willingham, has not had a recuriting class ranked above 24 (the current one is 90th), and is the only FBS school without a win halfway through the season.  The direction Notre Dame was being led by Willingham would have put the Irish in the position where just making a bowl would have been a significant achievement and staying within four touchdowns of USC would be a moral victory.

While in Weis' first three years he finished with a comparable record to Willingham at 22-15, he did lead a record setting ND offense under Brady Quinn that is looking to return to form under Clausen (currently ranked 17th of FBS school in passing yards per game), and the Irish have gone to two BCS games with a bowl berth looming in year four.  The biggest division between Willingham's capabilities and Weis' relates to the fact that Weis has pulled in two classes ranked 8th nationally, last year's class was ranked 2nd a year ago and is putting together another great class for next year.

So where are we left now?  We play the what if game and realize that Notre Dame would be in much the same position as Washington currently is, a consistently losing school with angry boosters and a massive rebuilding effort needed to become competitive again.  Without a doubt Notre Dame is better off sans Willingham, and I hope for the sake of college football he isn't awarded the opportunity to tear apart another program after Washington.  Unless Pete Carroll leaves and he gets hired at USC, I'd make an exception.

Why Fantasy Football is Bad for the Game

Raise your hand if you've ever had any of the following thoughts (substitute player names as appropriate):

1. Kurt Warner is my QB in one league where I'm losing, but I'm playing against him in my other league where I'm currently winning my match up so I need him to do well but not that well.
2. The Broncos (or any childhood favorite team) just scored a touchdown to beat the Raiders (or any hated team) but it was a run instead of a pass so I get no points and I'm disappointed.
3. One of my receivers, Santana Moss, is playing against my defense, Dallas, and I need him to get a lot of receptions and yards but not score, but if he does score then I need my defense to sack Campbell a few times or better yet make Portis fumble because the guy I'm playing is playing Portis.

Okay, so if you've played fantasy football, you probably have your hand up right now.  You can put it down because I can't see you helping me make my point and your co-workers are probably wondering why you have your arm waving in the air.

Originally I liked the idea of fantasy football because suddenly I had a stake in almost every game, which should make every game interesting in one form or another.  Instead, all I can think about while watching games now are complex scenarios of "if he does this, then I need to have this happen, but then this might happen so then I'll need that to work out."  Ridiculous!

Additionally, fantasy football stats are like trying to bet on the over/under for points in a game.  The team and players don't care about your CBS Sportsline just like most coaches (outside of Steve Spurrier) aren't actively trying to break the over every week.  If you like football because it's football, shouldn't it be enough to just watch the games and enjoy them for what they are instead of furiously calculating 0.1 for every rushing yard?  Shouldn't you just be happy your RB broke 100 yards in the game because that's a good sign your team is doing well rather than being happy because you get a bonus point?

Maybe I'm slowly becoming a purist in my old age, it is what it is - but next year I'm looking forward to a season where my only angst is if the Broncos lose to the Chargers.  Until that time though, I hope Steve Slaton keeps having a good year.