Wide-open AFC

Conference winners are anyone's guess; here are mine

You'll forgive me if I'm in a particularly ugly mood. Traffic court this morning. Pleading not guilty to making an illegal U-turn. You don't want to hear the particulars of this thing, but basically, if you're found guilty, it's three points on the license, and right now my license happens to be clean, which means that I'm in the Good Boys pool for car insurance. But the three points would bring me into the Bad Boys pool for three years, which amounts to around $200 more per year, so the penalty for the U-turn is six hundred bucks, plus the cost of the ticket. So naturally I showed up ready to sell out on my not guilty plea, and I sat there and watched the dregs of humanity receive various forms of New Jersey justice, and then finally it was my turn, hurray, and what I learned was that the cop who ticketed me was unavailable because he was on his honeymoon. So now I have to show up at a later date, and I am not in a good mood, you dig? So if I give some of your queries the old curled lip treatment, I hope you'll understand.

I don't want to jump right into the major topic of the day, which is Jim Fassel's management of the Tennessee game. Let me warm up first with some milder topics.

Lars of Clemson, Va., wants my top five choices for MVP at this point in the season. In order: Vick, Holmes, Tomlinson, Favre, Bledsoe. I'm doing this in zip-zap fashion, you understand, and on careful reflection this might be slightly amended, but that's what I can come up with now.

Robin of Oklahoma City would like my four AFC division winners, plus wild card teams. Division winners: Miami, Indy, Pittsburgh, San Diego. Wild cards: Tennessee, Oakland. Question: Have I ever seen anything in one conference so wide open before? Answer: never.

Mike of Sydney, Australia, wonders why the Bucs can't quite figure out when and how to use Mike Alstott and why everyone seems so down on him. Well, I wonder, too. Personally, I think he's a lot more dependable than Michael Pittman, whom I felt was a better back in Arizona than he is now. I would make Alstott the centerpiece of whatever running game they try to get going down the stretch.

A two-parter from Garrison of Bloomington, Ill.: Why do so many DBs seem kind of lost when the moment of truth -- i.e., the ball -- arrives? Well, I'm seeing worse play by defensive backs now than I ever have. I think it has something to do with all that double zone that teams use. Shutdown corners are a rare commodity these days. Part 2: Have I ever tried the wines at the Biltmore Estate in North Carolina? No. But you lose me, pal, when you say you don't consider Zinfandel wine ("more like wine coolers"). Oh brother. Don't you understand that Zinfandel is a red wine and the white Zin craze was a mere aberration? And as a red wine, it's just fine. But you said you don't drink anymore, so this whole thing is merely academic, right? In other words, a waste of time.

Mike of Philly likes the Eagles as Super Bowl front-runners, even with Koy Detmer running things and Donovan McNabb, hopefully, able to function some time before the final verdict is in. Well, so far so good, but first they have to get by Seattle on the road this weekend, and that's a trap game, with Washington coming up the following week. On paper, they can run the table, and Detmer turned in a fine job against the Niners, and all that, but I feel, down deep, that they're kind of living on borrowed time until McNabb returns -- if he does.

Anthony of Jackson, N.J., likes the way his Vikings have performed lately and feels that they might be only two free agents (outside pass rusher and cornerback) away from the playoffs. First they have to straighten out their quarterback, then make sure he and Randy Moss remain on the same page. Two big ifs there.

Here we go again, Bulger and Warner from a Rams fan in Ottawa named Michael. Well, let's forget the tight spiral, etc., for a while and concentrate on the offensive line, which is a disaster. Bulger could function behind it, Warner couldn't. That's the first piece of evidence. Now let's talk about next year, since 2002 is kaput. Say they get a good right tackle, plus a good utility guy, either through the draft or free agency, and there's no reason to believe they won't, since they did a decent job addressing their defensive deficiencies last year. What then? Will Warner shrug off the bad moments of this season and revert to the old Warner, or will he still be in some kind of semi-shock, something like the basket case he was against the Eagles? Did 2002 put scars on him that are difficult to detect but would linger? And what do they do with Bulger, clearly a superior talent, or maybe even better than that? We can only wait and see. None of this can be answered now. Thank you for what you added about my work. Your sentiments are sincerely appreciated.

From Bruce of San Francisco: Why has the Niners' offense died in the fourth quarter the last few games? This might sound dopey, but sometimes a team can get spoiled by too many early leads. It goes on cruise control and loses some of the killer instinct. Sometimes the enemy defense just catches up to what you're doing and gets a better read, and clever game planning won't do it anymore. You have to win on heart and toughness, San Diego being a good example. I think both cases could apply to San Francisco.

To J.P. of Green Bay, who asks for my choice right now for Coach of the Year and G.M. of the Year: Andy Reid's my coach, but that could change. Mike Sherman's a strong candidate. So is Marty Schottenheimer, and I never thought the Raiders' Bill Callahan would get it together the way he has. In other words, no clear choice. My G.M. of the Year is Randy Mueller, who was fired in New Orleans during the offseason. Thanks for the nice things you wrote, and regarding your reference to Bonny Doon Winery, try their sparkling muscat, the Ca Del Solo. More of a summer wine, and I hope you're not scared off by a little sugar, but it's simply delicious. Your Warren Sapp comments will be addressed later.

Colby of Baton Rouge, La., feels that the success or failure of the Saints' offense has rested on whether or not LeCharles Bentley has been healthy. Sure, that's part of it, but I watched him very closely against the Bucs and yes, he's a good player, but not the superman you made him out to be. He didn't, for instance, bury Sapp single-handedly. They still had to double team him. But Bentley is definitely a guy on the rise, quite possibly a future All-Pro.

Damion of Austin, Texas, is bugged by the erratic way the NFL's down-by-contact rule is called and the fact that it can't be reviewed. The league sends us tape after tape of officiating points, and I still don't understand why some crews will call this play one way and other ones will react differently. The worst calls, I feel, come in the areas of greatest congestion, when officials' views are shielded. I don't know what can be done, but the whole thing bugs me, too.

I'm glad that at least two of you, Luke of L.A, and Chris of Tallahassee, Fla., share my views about Steve Herndon's cheap shot to the back of Jamal Williams' legs. There's nothing much for me to add that I didn't write in the column, but I'm happy that you feel the same way I do about it. The NFL has fined him $17,647, which is one week's pay based on his modest salary of $300,000. Financially, it makes some kind of sense. It's less than other major fines have been, but Herndon makes a lot less than those other players do. But, to me, it's all just numbers. As I've said before, I would throw Herndon out until the guy he crippled comes back.

Now I'm ready for you Giants fans -- Tom of Edison, N.J.; Herb of Manhattan Beach, Calif.; James of Edgewater, N.J.; Dan of New Jersey; Rob of Portland, Ore.; and all the rest of you out there who echoed their sentiments, namely that Jim Fassel screwed up various elements of the game.

First, let's talk about going for the deuce when leading by 12. I can only repeat what I wrote, that it made sense at the time. I had a talk with Fassel on Monday. "You simply have no idea of how bad that wind was down there," he said, "how hard it was to move against it." Which accounts for the fact that he didn't, logically, feel that he was going to score in the fourth quarter. You might say that this represents negative thinking. Possibly, but it's realistic, too. But then he did score in the fourth quarter, against the wind. But it wasn't the same wind. I've seen this happen in Giants Stadium. It's quirky. The wind just seems to lighten up in the late afternoon.

Rob of Portland brings up an interesting point. Given the unpredictable nature of things, you should always go for one point instead of two, until very late in the game when the decision becomes obvious. There's something to be said for this. Things get wild down there on the sidelines, so coaches refer to their chart, which tells them when to go for two, etc. The problem is the chart itself. Many of those handy guides were drawn up when the two-pointer came into college ball back in 1959. It was a different game then. Field goal kickers were a lot less accurate. They didn't have the same range. Their proficiency has changed the nature of scoring, especially in the NFL, and maybe the one-point, two-point charts should be updated to reflect that. So if you want to blame Fassel for being outdated, for relying on a set of do's and don'ts that was drawn up many years ago, OK, you have a point. But almost every NFL coach is in the same boat.

Tom of Edison questions Fassel's play-calling on the Titans' 1-yard line, two runs and a pass. He wanted a run on third down, to force Tennessee to burn a timeout or lose 30 seconds or so on the clock. Sorry, but when you're down there you're thinking only one thing: touchdown. Seven points puts the game away and that's the real concern.

Then there was the question of that soft defense. Why should the coordinator get the blame and not Fassel, who's supposed to oversee all areas of the operation? Let me try to think along with them. On one first-down play, when the Titans were driving for their first touchdown in the fourth quarter, the Giants sent in seven rushers, the down four, plus three, an all-out blitz. McNair went hot to Derrick Mason and picked up 15 yards. Things like that scare defensive coordinators, plus everyone on the sidelines. So from then on it was fall back and catch it. Don't forget that middle linebacker Mike Barrow was out and a very untested Kevin Lewis was manning the position, and the MLB is the one who stays on the field in the Giants' nickel and dime packages. Plus the corners were shaky. The fear was that the Titans would score quickly, and unfortunately, that kind of thinking pervaded the later going, right into overtime, when some kind of pressure was certainly called for. In other words, things were crumbling.

In overtime it was a walkover for Tennessee. So, while things are going on, Fassel gets on the phone and tells defensive coordinator Johnnie Lynn, "Hey, we've got to tighten up." And they did. When the Titans reached New York's 19-yard line, the Giants blitzed. But in the meantime Tennessee had run two plays for good yardage against the soft D. The Giants were a beat behind. Two beats, actually. You're right, Fassel should have gotten things tightened up before it was too late. His coordinator should have shown more courage. It was an overall screw-up.

Finally, comments about Warren Sapp's hit on Chad Clifton. "It may have been legal but it wasn't right," says J.P. of Green Bay. "The two are not synonymous."

Same sentiments, in essence, from Jim of Fredericton, New Brunswick, and Jeff of Boston, Richard of Lewisburg, Pa., Derek of Falls Church, Va., and Bob of West Chester, Pa. Glad you feel the way I do, gentlemen, and I thank you for your supporting comments.

Have a comment or question for Dr. Z? Click here.

 

Related information

Stories

/inside_game/archives/dr._z/

Multimedia

Visit Video Plus for the latest audio and video