Mmmm... Football Donuts and the Super Bowl pick.

As if staying away from their delicious donuts (i think they spell it doughnuts tho) isn't hard enough, Krispy Kreme is making football shaped and decorated donuts. AND you can get them in team colors... those horrible horrible people. I'm rediculous enough to want them in Skins color.

First, just to clarify one point which I've been making: I don't think the Steelers are a bad team. In fact, I have never thought they were a bad team, the ONLY thing I ever did was questioned their offense. It doesn't detract from them when I said they have been lucky... it's just the truth: they were fortunate to not have to play against Carson Palmer and they were fortunate Nick Harper ran right at Ben Roethlisberger after Jerome Bettis' fumble.

This week they played excellent, probably their best game of the season, AND they were lucky. (Most of the time when team A blows out team b, luck is involved. That's not to say team A couldn't have won otherwise, but luck made a blowout easier.)

The Steelers were helped to a comparatively easy win as Jake Plummer reverted to his usual self. The Broncos had a chance to win it all, if they relied on the run and had Plummer pull a "Trent Dilfer" (throw for 150 yards, one touchdown and NO turnovers). Instead, Jake Plummer pulled a "Jake Plummer" (223 yards, 2 interceptions and 2 fumbles). I guess he was right when, after a win against the Redskins where he threw for 92 yards, he dismissed his performance by saying, "Later in the season, you don't remember how they came, you only remember it's a win." True, they might not remember how that win came, but they will rememeber how this loss came... both in games Plummer let his team down.

So now the Steelers move on to play the Seattle Seahawks. My initial feelings are that I would like Seattle to win, because they haven't won one and the Steelers have won 4. But, my pick is:

Pittsburgh Steeler OVER Seattle Seahawks - This should be a close game but I get the feeling it won't be close in the end (maybe close on the scoreboard but not in reality). The Steelers should take the lead early (7-0), maybe allow a tie in 2nd period (17-17), and hit a field goal going into halftime (20-17). Then they'll come out maybe give up a TD (20-24) early in the 3rd, but make it up with 2 TD in the 3rd and 4th (34-24), and control Seattle's offense for most of the 4th quarter, maybe giving up a field goal... 34-27. Is my entirely unfounded guess.

NFL Conference Championships and the Redskins are done

So after 6 straight weeks, I finally got a Redskins pick right. The Redskins finished their season in a rather familiar way. The defense starts off well while the offense struggles, the defense finally cracks and the offense eventually starts to click but it turns out to be not enough and too late. As cliched as it sounds, it was a microcosm of the season.

I would say it was a disappointing end, but that would detract from a pretty darn good season. Although I thought the Redskins were a 10 win team back in September (In fact, I said: "Now I'm not saying the Redskins are going 11-5 this season, but I seriously don't think 10-6 is out of the question"), I was still surprised when they rattled off 5 wins at the end of the season to get into the playoffs. It was fun to say the least.

So they finished in the top 8 and did better than the Bears and Colts (at least the Skins got 1 playoff win... on the road even) and did about as well as Patriots (but the Redskins didn't get the advantage of a home playoff game). So in my book they're at least the 6th best team in the league. And I don't want to hear any talk about the 120 yards of offense in the win against the Bucs, they were heavily depleted and injured from those grueling 5 straight wins. Plus they weren't playing to rack up points, they were playing to keep a lead.

Which brings me to the addition of Al Saunders to the coaching staff. I'm hesitant because I am a strong believer in the idea of less chefs in the kitchen, but what has me believing is Joe Gibbs. I trust that he can keep everything (and everyone) in check.

Anyways more on that later... now on to the teams that remain in the Super Bowl picture:

Pittsburgh Steelers - First I need to repeat what everyone has already said: The Steelers were royally screwed by the botched instant replay call and had they lost that game, they would have every right to stab someone. Having said that... I still (and I've been saying this all year, just check the link above) question the Steeler's offense. That offense combined with a good/great defense won them the game at Indy, but the Colts were obviously not the same team that won 13 straight. They were the same team that has a history of choking in the playoffs. Plus the week before that, they got "lucky" when Carson Palmer got hurt.

Denver Broncos - The Broncos are another one of those teams that I've questioned all year. Although while I did a Top 10, I usually had them in the top 3 or 4, I still called them "not all that good." (Like when they beat the Redskins, but that was more of a response to how they played against the Skins.) But my misgivings about the Broncos aren't as much as they are about the Steelers.

Carolina Panthers - I'll admit, I have slept on the Panthers all year. I had only seen them play in highlight shows (I don't remember if I saw them in their MNF appearance), so I knew they had Steve Smith but the rest of the team seemed pedestrian. Plus, they were in a division I felt was weak because there was no clear good/great team. In fact, every team seemed just below average. So Tampa Bay and Atlanta proved to be that, but the Panthers have stepped it up. The only thing is that they've been pretty fortunate in these playoffs. The Giants (who should have been a formidable opponent) layed down for them, and then they had to go to play a weak Chicago Bears team from what was, I thought, the worst division in the NFC.

Seattle Seahawks - I saw the Seahawks and Bears play the Skins back in September, and it was CLEAR the Seahawks were a better team. The Bears defense wasn't as good as people would later say, and the Seahawks offense was about as good as billed. So although, record-wise, they started off bad, I thought they were a good team. (Actually both the Bears and Seahawks fatten up their records on weak opponents, but the Bears had a tougher time of it.)

So here are my picks:

at Denver OVER Pittsburgh - As I said, my misgivings about Denver aren't as big as they are about Pittsburgh. Everyone loves saying that Pittsburgh is the "hottest" team in the NFL because of their 6 game winning streak, but no one says in the next sentence that Denver has their own 5 game winning streak. As I have mentioned Pittsburgh, like the Panthers, have gotten lucky on the road. First Carson Palmer's leg gets broken, along with the Bengals fragile hopes and then the Colts choke away a gift from the NFL refs and then Jerome Bettis.

at Seattle OVER Carolina - I'll say it one more time... the Panthers have gotten lucky in the playoffs. And I don't mean "lucky the other team fumbled" or "lucky they won on a Hail Mary." I mean lucky their opponents haven't been playoff quality, either because of a young QB (Giants) or just not a good team in general (Bears). Seattle didn't exactly inspire me in their win against the Skins, but they moved the ball on a good defense.

Finally, the only thing that scares me about these picks? Oddly the Panthers and Steelers are better road teams then home teams... they were both 5-3 at home and 6-2 (8-2 including the playoffs) on the road. They both had the best road records in the league. But hey, Seattle and Denver were the only teams that went undefeated at home? Sounds like fun to me...

Alexander Ovechkin should win the Hart Trophy

Remember in Rocky IV when Apollo Creed fought Ivan Drago. Drago's first words in the movie were right before they fought. In a thick Russian accent, he said "I will break you." I think they need to play that clip every time they mention Alexander Ovechkin at the MCI Center.

Ovechkin had his first NHL hat trick last night, scoring all of the Capitals goals in a 3-2 overtime win against the Anaheim Mighty Ducks. He now ranks 3rd in goals and 8th in points and leads his team in both categories. Ovechkin could certainly have more assists if he had someone to assist. (There is only one other player with double digit goals: Danius Zubrus with 10).

Nothing against The Kid, Sidney Crosby, but he's not near Ovechkin. The Russian has to have Rookie of the Year (Calder Memorial Trophy) wrapped up. Now, it's just a matter of if Ovechkin deserves the NHL MVP and I, as an unabashed homer, think he does. Unfortunately, unless your team at least makes the playoffs, you probably won't be winning the Hart Trophy. But, I can hope can't I?

Where is the real Brokeback Mountain and a new view of Heath Ledger

I finally saw Brokeback Mountain and got curious as to if it really existed. I looked it up and found that someone had already researched it. To sum it up: It's not real. The author of the short story, Annie Proulx, (who btw seems a little full of herself) says the name is adapted from a place called Break Back Mountain in Wyoming, but the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) says there aint such a thing. There is, however, a Brokenback Narrows, Creek, and Dam, a Brokenback Mountain near there doesn't seem far-fetched.

About the movie: I liked it. I thought it was a very good movie that, unfortunately, didn't live up to the hype. I had heard good things about it. Things that I was hoping weren't influenced by the controversial topic and the ensuing controversy about the movie (like the canceled screenings in Utah). Those things might have influenced the good reviews but nonetheless I thought it was par for an Ang Lee movie, good but not outstanding.

What did surprise me was the great job done by Heath Ledger. You see, when I first saw Heath Ledger it was in the modern remake of one my favorite Shakespeare plays, "Ten Things I Hate about You." (Which was based on "The Taming of the Shrew") Sadly that remake was an unabashed teen flick and Ledger overplayed it as would be expected. Then he made "The Patriot" and "A Knight's Tale" and did nothing to change my initial perception of him. So last year when I saw the previews to "Cassanova" my thoughts that he was doomed for "Ryan Phillippe" status (perpetual pretty face in teen flicks... no need to act, just look good) were reinforced.

But Ledger totally surprised me. He played the soft spoken but strong willed Ennis Del Mar convincingly. He didn't overdo the macho "I'm not a gay cowboy" angle. He was certainly not one dimensional and gave Ennis those subtle qualities which can make you forget an actor is acting. Not surprisingly, I have a new found respect for him.

2006 NFL Playoffs: Divisional Playoffs

First a few thoughts about my stupendous 1-3 record for last week. Yes I suck, but allow me to make up some excuses.

I'm fairly certain the Steelers wouldn't be chanting "We Dey!" had Carson Palmer not gotten hurt. And it wasn't just his arm... that team tried hard to convince themselves that they could win without Palmer, but once they hit some adversity they folded.

I'll admit, I slept on the Panthers. But I'm still not buying them. I think they were somewhat lucky in walloping the Giants. Tiki Barber wasn't seeing the holes he had been getting all year, and Eli Manning withered in his first playoff game. I can only hope that the Skins win and they get as fortunate against the Bears. Then the Redskins would be in Carolina for the NFC Championship. Unfortunately, my picks might reflect this hope in the reverse karma way...

Now about those chances here are two lists. First, Things I don't like the Redskins' chances on Saturday:

• The fact that the Redskins barely beat the Seahawks at FedEx Field back in October. The Skins got their revenge on Tampa, we'll see about the Seahawks...
  
• The Redskins aren't all that good on the road. Although, including last week, they are a somewhat respectable 5-4, two were come from behind 4th quarter wins (Philly and Dallas). They had problems finishing off comebacks in Denver, Kansas City and Tampa.
  
• Probably the most important point: Home teams in the divisional rounds win about 80% of the time.
  

Things I like about the Redskins' chances on Saturday:

• The Redskins barely won that game at FedEx and when you barely win, you should treat it like a loss and feel lucky. You should seriously rethink your plan and innovate. Fortunately, Gregg Williams is more than capable of this. His defense seems to do well when it has an opportunity to adjust. The Redskins did much better in their second games against the Cowboys and Giants and, in fact, they're 4-0 in rematch games.
  
• The Seahawks are overrated. They played 5 teams with winning records: losing 2 of those games (to Jacksonville and the Redskins); winning 2 games that were handed to them against Dallas and New York (both in Seattle) when Dallas' Drew Bledsoe threw a last minute interception and New York's Jay Feely missed 3 makeable field goals. And they beat a Colts team that had nothing to play for and sat their best players for most of the game.
  
• Although everyone is pointing out that the Seahawks are 8-0 at home here is a list of those opponents: Atlanta, Arizona, Houston, Dallas, St. Louis, NY Giants, San Francisco, and Indianapolis. Aside from Dallas, NY and Indy (which I just discussed) the other teams were a combined 25-55.
  
• The Skins might not have been good on the road, but the past two weeks they have come from behind and held on to leads in must win situations. Two things they were having problems with early in the mid-season.
  
• It seems like NO ONE thinks the Skins have a chance.
  

And finally to the picks:

at Seattle OVER Redskins - I can't change my tune now can I?

at Denver OVER New England - I want to be among those that think New England shouldn't be picked against, but I can't bring myself to think that. Denver is a good team especially at home. New England has been a good playoff team, but they've had most of those games at home. Anyways this is my iffy game. I'm just not sure.

at Indianapolis OVER Pittsburgh - This is my non-iffy game. I'm am too sure about this one. First, Indy beat Pittsburgh well back in November. Plus, Pittsburgh got fortunate against the Bengals. Finally, remember how I haven't been convinced by Pittsburgh all year?

at Chicago OVER Carolina - Carolina's wins against Atlanta and New York are making people believe they are the team that deserved to be on the cover of Sports Illustrated as that magazine's pick to win the Super Bowl at the beginning of the season. Well, I pretty sure they played in the NFC South, and had losses to New Orleans, Miami (when they were still iffy), and Tampa and Dallas (at home). That last loss? A 13-3 loss at home to the Bears.

Restaurant Week Winter 2006

It's that time of year again where things have slowed down... and Restaurant Week is here once again.

If you're not familiar with it, just click on the link. In essence, swank restaurants around the city offer pretty good full course meals at a fixed price: Lunch for $20.06 and Dinner for $30.06. Considering how much the places normally run, it's a pretty good deal.

Redskins: sweet revenge

In case you didn't already know (since it's been repeated incessantly all week) the last time the Redskins were in they playoffs they lost to Tampa Bay 14-13, missing a field goal for the win on a bad snap. The last time the Redskins played in Tampa Bay, they lost 36-35 on a 2-point conversion that wasn't. Yeah... that was a nice win. Ugly, as everyone seems to want to point out, but a win nonetheless.

And now I am worried, because the Redskins got lucky to beat the Seahawks back in September. It would definitely give the Seahawks incentive, but I'm hoping that, since few people are giving the Redskins a chance, it will give them some incentive. We can only hope...

The NFL Playoff picks

I don't know what to do. Back when I decided to pick against the Redskins for the rest of the season, I really didn't think they were going to make the playoffs. I BADLY wanted them to make it, I just thought they wouldn't. Now, I almost feel obliged to pick against them again for consistency, for karma... for whatever! Anyways, here are my picks for this weekend's playoff games:

at Tampa Bay OVER Washington - That hurts... I don't really want to say anything more about this game aside from I seriously hope to go 7-4 in the playoffs.

at New England OVER Jacksonville - I spent the entire season talking about how I liked the Jaguars even though they played a soft schedule. Now they're in the playoffs having played ONE significant opponent since mid-october, and they lost that game to the Colts. Before that they had wins against quality teams like Seattle, Cincinnati and Pittsburgh, but those were almost 3 months ago. So I'm believing the New England hype even though they've only beaten two good (playoff) teams all year. ATS I would undoubtedly go with Jacksonville though.

at NY Giants OVER Carolina - I don't trust Eli Manning. And I especially don't trust him in his first playoff game. I just don't trust the Panthers even more... you know they're in the NFC South and all. True they probably got screwed by the refs against the Cowboys two weeks ago, but it should never have come to that, especially at home and when it counted.

at Cincinnati OVER Pittsburgh - I hate this pick for many reasons. For one, the Bengals go into this game following back to back regular season ending losses to Buffalo and Kansas City. They had already wrapped up the division, but they were still playing for a first round bye. So it's not like they just shut it down, like the Colts. Also they lost the last time they played the Steelers at home (It almost seems like home field isn't much of an advantage to them). But I'm going with them because of the following: First, remember how I haven't like the Steelers all year? Second, everyone is loving the Steelers because of their 4 game winning streak going in, but they've only had to play one good team (Chicago) in that span. And the last game before that streak? A home loss to Cincinnati... but that also makes me think they're looking for revenge. See now why I hate this pick?

Experimental Music: Longest Concert, ever.

I've always wanted to consider myself open-minded about most things. It really bothers me when supposedly enlightened people (Marilyn vos Savant and her equating Picasso's work to the Emperor's New Clothes always comes to mind) are quick to dismiss things they apparently don't understand. That's not to say I think of myself as "enlightened"... anyways back to the point.

So Nearing 5 years into the world's longest lasting concert, the second chord will sound soon. (just click the link if that doesn't make senses) Now I don't want to dismiss it as a gimmick, but it sure does sound like one. I wouldn't say it isn't art, but when you're notable because you're making the Guiness Book of World Records you really have to question your artistic integrity. If I wanted to make a 1000 by 1000 ft painting/mural would that make me "experimental?" I guess so, but then I don't think being called "experimental" when it comes to art is a good thing.

Peter Jackson and King Kong

I have seen two Peter Jackson movies and I am steadily growing a dislike for his work. I saw the first Lord of the Rings movie and I, unlike apparently everyone else in the world, did not look forward to watching the rest of the series. I thought the story and cinematography were excellent. But I thought the plotline was lethargic and some themes were too repetitive.

I just saw King Kong and I can say the same things about it. The movie started out promising, but it was too long. Now I don't want to ruin the movie for anyone, so I'll just explain some film ideas and explain in broad terms how King Kong failed. (I'll try not to give anything away.)

First, what most people are talking about: the movie is too long. Now there is nothing inately wrong with a 3 hour movie and in fact there are a bunch of good 3 hour movies (Lawrence of Arabia comes to mind). The problem is that it could easily be shorter, considering how long some scenes are and how many times you see a similar reaction or occurence. Jackson tries to add too many elements to the movie and in the process leaves holes in the story. If he explained everything the movie could easily be 4 or 5 hours long.

Second, and this might give something away, but I don't need to see Kong's "tender side" over and over again. I get it, the gorilla is kind when not attacked. And every "tender moment" doesn't need to be interrupted by gun shots or other kinds of attacks.

Third, and this a "rule" that all of hollywood has been breaking for awhile: just because you can do something (with special effects, etc.) it doesn't mean you SHOULD do it. I don't think I'm ruining anything when I say, there is much more special effects than the Gorilla and T-Rex that you see in the preview. And that's not exactly a good thing.

Anyways, I guess when you get down to it, I think Jackson needs a better editor. I understand that most Lord of the Ring fans appreciate the trilogy because it is fairly true to the books. But King Kong has no basis for such an extensive rendering. It seemed like he was given free reign, after (and during) the success of the Rings trilogy and now King Kong is monstrous (pun intended) production.

Redskins: 10-6 and in.

The Season: I'll be honest, 5 weeks ago I really thought the Redskins were done. As you could probably guess from my writings all year, I thought they had what it took, but I thought winning 5 in a row would be impossible. Impossible because they weren't getting calls, playing well or finishing games well. So I dismissed their chances of making the playoffs, by saying: Redskins, 5-6 and done! Well I am extremely happy to say, I was wrong!

This Game: Make no mistake about it Redskins defense won this game. Sure Clinton Portis and the offensive line ran well, but they consistently had short fields because of turnovers caused by the defense. When they had a long field to cross, the drives would sputter. Plus when they could have put it away by running the clock out, they couldn't get 10 yards. So you have to credit the defense with this win.
The offensive struggles can be attributed to the fact that the Eagles defense, although not highly ranked, was still intact and still pretty good. So my only problem was that the defense allowed the Eagles too many yards. They kept them from scoring, not so much by stopping them, but by taking the ball away. That's not something to get used to living by. It reminded me of the mid-season, you know, when they went 2-6.

Into the Playoffs: Obviously a thorough beating of the not-so-good Eagles would be a better way to enter the playoffs. But a win like this is almost as good because they had 2 rather easy wins going into this game. It's akin to a loss when you're 13-0... It makes you play harder next time because it brings you back down to earth. Hopefully the Redskins remembered to not take anyone lightly. The reason why this is almost as good is because through it all, they still won... there is no doubt, the Redskins are on a roll.

The Next Game: As I stated I would LOVE to see the Redskins play the Bucs... ask and ye shall receive, I guess. The Bucs game was the start of a 3 game losing streak. A streak in which the Redskins led in the 4th quarter of each game but couldn't hold on. Well, the Redskins have learned to keep their leads in the past 5 games and it's time for a rematch...