Thursday, October 20, 2011

Week 7 Picks

Dear ESPN: We don't want to watch this guy and his stupid hair on MNF. Please get us a real
In looking ahead to Week 7, here are three things that stand out to me…

1. Awful Schedule – A large group of bad teams just had their bye and, unfortunately, we’re now facing a week where a large group of good/exciting/interesting teams are on byes. Buffalo, Cincinnati, New England, New York, Philadelphia, and San Francisco are all off this week, leaving us with such gems as Seattle vs. Cleveland, Denver vs. Miami, and Washington vs. Carolina. Yippee. As if that weren’t bad enough, the Sunday Night game features Indianapolis getting blown out by New Orleans, and the Monday Night game features Jacksonville getting crushed by Baltimore. Can we flex a couple bye week teams in? Please?

2. QB Changes – Several teams made QB changes this week and it will be fascinating to see how some of them play out. John Beck is the new starter in Washington, Charlie Whitehurst (probably/hopefully) in Seattle, Tim Tebow in Denver, Christian Ponder in Minnesota, Carson Palmer in Oakland, and Stephen McGee in Dallas (just kidding). It’s pretty rare for this many QB changes to happen in one season, much less one week. Obviously Tim Tebow and Carson Palmer are getting the most press, but the Whitehurst thing could actually be a big deal. If they can beat Cleveland, they’ll only be two back of San Francisco with one more meeting left. Not saying it’s likely or anything…just pointing things out.

3. Do or Die – Atlanta, Houston, New York, Washington, and Chicago all face tough matchups that could make or break their seasons. Washington has it the easiest among the group as they face a bad Panthers team with the downside being 3-3. Either way, the Redskins had no right to expect anything from this season anyways. The other teams, however, are staring disappointment and disaster square in the eye. Expected to be major players in their respective divisions/conferences, a fall to 3-4 would be tough to overcome. It’ll be a tall task to avoid it though, as Atlanta faces Detroit on the road, Houston faces division leader Tennessee on the road, New York takes on San Diego at home, and Chicago plays Tampa Bay on the road.

As for the Week 6 picks, it was a good week for yours truly. Facing a 7 game deficit, I needed a big week to keep this a contest. Basically, I was the Eagles and Prince was the Redskins. Thankfully, I was able to put up enough points early on to overcome a late charge by Prince. Let’s see how things went.

(Remember, Prince and I are going head to head with our picks. No prize has been determined yet, but ideas are happily accepted.)

Week 6 Results (point spread in parentheses)

Landrum: 8-5 (9-4)
Prince: 8-5 (6-7)

Week 4 Winner: Landrum +3

Results through Week 6 (point spread in parentheses)

Landrum: 55-35 (45-38)
Prince: 59-31 (45-38)
Overall Leader: Prince +4

Prince still has the lead, but I made big headway in closing the gap. Unfortunately, there’s not much headway to be made in Week 7, as we agreed on pretty much everything.

Seattle at Cleveland (CLE -3)

Jon: Seattle (SEA +3)
Prince: Seattle (SEA +3)

It appears as if Seattle will be without their starting QB for this game…and that’s a really good thing. We only have a small sampling of Charlie Whitehurst, so it’s impossible to declare him “good,” but I think it’s probably safe to say he’s a big improvement over Tarvaris Jackson. That’s not a bold claim considering Seattle ranks near the bottom of the league in passing offense. However, they have quietly assembled some decent weapons in Zach Miller and Doug Baldwin. While they’ll never be the 2007 Patriots, it’s not hard to envision Whitehurst having some success. In contrast, it looks like the wheels might be falling off for the Browns. With the Madden Curse in full effect, the once dominant run game has completely evaporated to the point where Cleveland ranks an abysmal 30th in rushing yards per game. Ouch! That wouldn’t be quite so demoralizing if Cleveland didn’t boast (or whatever the opposite of boasting is) the most inefficient passing game in recent memory. Colt McCoy has the 7th most attempts in the NFL, but thanks to his horrendous 5.53 yards per attempt, he only ranks 21st in yardage. In review, the Browns suck at gaining yards in the run game AND suck at gaining yards in the passing game. Umm, that seems like a problem.

Atlanta at Detroit (DET -4.5)

Jon: Detroit (DET -4.5)
Prince: Detroit (DET -4.5)

After suffering their first loss of the year, it will be interesting to see how Detroit responds this week. The glitzy 5-0 start certainly got everyone excited, but it also served to mask some major problems that indicate the Lions might not be as good as their record suggests. The most notable problem area has to be third down efficiency, where the Lions have converted only 30.5% of their third down attempts (28th in the league). The weird thing is I think Detroit will be better with Jahvid Best out. His massive 163 yard game against Chicago makes his numbers look decent, but he’s gone for Y/A averages of 3.4, 3.6, 1.2, 4.3, and 3.1 in the rest of their games. Basically, he’s not good. It’s no coincidence that Detroit’s offense gets better when they have a deficit, as putting the emphasis on Stafford and Johnson makes them far more dangerous. I’m guessing we’ll see a VERY fired up Lions team that looks to throw it early and throw it often. With Atlanta allowing 283.3 passing yards per game, I fully expect Detroit to hang a big number on them.

Houston at Tennessee (TEN -3)

Jon: Tennessee (TEN -3)
Prince: Houston (HOU +3)

This was the absolute hardest game to pick this week and it was the only one that Prince and I disagreed on. Boring, right? Well, considering the injuries to both teams, it’s no wonder that they seem so evenly matched. It’s not that I feel good about Tennessee; it’s that I feel really bad about Houston. The injuries to Andre Johnson and Mario Williams have seemingly sucked the life out of them and I have serious doubts about their ability to rebound…especially considering their joke of a coaching staff. If Chris Johnson is ever going to bust out of his slump, it will be against the porous Texans D. Still, Houston seems like the more talented team and I hate picking against talent. I’ll stick with Tennessee here, but I don’t feel good about it.

Denver at Miami (MIA -3)

Jon: Denver (DEN +3)
Prince: Denver (DEN +3)

TEBOW TIME!!! OK, so I’ve already spoken my peace on Tebow…several times. I’ll spare you another rant. All I know is that there is NO WAY I’m EVER picking Matt Moore. He is awful! Just dreadful! The most interesting thing about this game will be seeing what creative ways the “experts” can reason away any positive thing Tebow does. Always a treat!

San Diego at New York Jets (SD -1.5)

Jon: San Diego (SD -1.5)
Prince: San Diego (SD -1.5)

3-3 record aside, things are getting ugly up in Jets land. Rex Ryan’s idiotic rants are all fun and games when the Jets are turning teams over four times a game and ramming the ball down their throats for 200 yards. However, it’s a whole different ball game when they have a middle of the road defense and a bottom feeder running game. That’s right, the powerful ‘pound-and-ground’ New York Jets rank 31st in rushing yards per game. Hmm…maybe Rex shouldn’t be knocking Norv Turner when he’s struggling to compete against the Miami Dolphins. At this point, I’m nearly 100% out on the Jets, and the likely return of Antonio Gates means the Chargers are probably going punch them square in the mouth. For all us Rex-haters out there (and Mark Sanchez), that’s exactly what we like to see. Just be careful you get that hand out of there quick or he’ll probably take a big bite!

Chicago at Tampa Bay (CHI -1.5)

Jon: Tampa Bay (+1.5)
Prince: Tampa Bay (+1.5)

This is an idiotic line in every way conceivable. Tampa Bay not only has a better record, but they had a more impressive performance last week. So what if Chicago beat up on Minnesota? The Viking suck! Even the Chiefs beat them! Meanwhile, Tampa Bay is off taking care of business against an actual contender in the Saints. All I can figure is that the beating Tampa Bay took at the hands of the 49ers is still ringing in peoples ears. If that’s the case, then I can somewhat understand. The truth is that I still don’t quite know what to make of either team as both continue to notch victories despite having bottom of the league passing defenses. That’s not a formula for success in today’s NFL, so my gut tells me neither team is for real. At some point, the Bears aren’t going to get that special teams score they so heavily rely on, and that’s when the wheels fall off. Josh Freeman finally broke out of his funk last week and I’ll happily take the better offensive team at home.

Washington at Carolina (CAR -3)

Jon: Carolina (CAR -3)
Prince: Carolina (CAR -3)

John Beck is starting for the Redskins this week and it’s going to take a lot more than 3 Cam Newton INT’s to drop this one. It doesn’t make a bit of difference to me that Washington has the third ranked scoring defense, because John Beck is that bad. If you can’t beat out Rex Grossman in an open QB competition, then there’s absolutely no hope for you to succeed in the NFL. As for Newton, it will be interesting to see how he responds to his first bad start. As crappy as the Redskins are, they still boast the league’s 3rd ranked scoring defense. This will be a nice test for Newton and an excellent opportunity to get some positive “winning” reps.

Kansas City at Oakland (OAK -3.5)

Jon: Oakland (OAK -3.5)
Prince: Oakland (OAK -3.5)

Carson Palmer, Carson Palmer, Carson Palmer. That’s pretty much the scoop on this game. Given that this is his first game since last year, my guess is they’ll keep things simple with a heavy dose of McFadden and plenty of short, safe routes. Oh wait, that’s pretty much been their offense the entire year. On the podcast, I nearly talked myself into taking Kansas City on the basis of their “improved play.” This sounded good in my head…until Prince pointed out there two wins were over Minnesota and Indianapolis. Touché, Prince! So yeah, Oakland wins big.

Pittsburgh at Arizona (PIT -4)

Jon: Pittsburgh (PIT -4)
Prince: Pittsburgh (PIT -4)

Much like an eclipse, it’s not wise to look directly at Kevin Kolb, lest your eyes be burned out of your skull. Yes, he’s been that bad. As for Pittsburgh, their big breakout is coming very soon. Thanks to some less than impressive performance early in the season, they’re easily the most undervalued team in the league and it would be very unwise to count them out. While their offense is struggling to score points (19.8, 22nd), they’re having no problem putting up yards (373YPG, 10th). And while their defense has been unable to get turnovers (2, 32nd); they’ve had no problem shutting teams down (17.0 PPG, 4th). The most important numbers to keep in mind are the passing Y/A they allow (5.4, 1st) and the passing Y/A they put up (8.2, t-6th). Those have been proven to be the biggest indicators of success in the modern NFL. Basically, every statistic clearly shows the Steelers as a great team that’s down on their luck. Once that luck starts to swing (and it will), watch out.

St. Louis at Dallas (DAL -10.5)

Jon: Dallas (STL +10.5)
Prince: Dallas (STL +10.5)

I’m so terrified of this game that I’m seriously tempted not to watch it. What good could possibly come from it? How happy can I possibly be about beating a winless team? On the other hand, if we lose…well, you may never hear from me again. Getting Brandon Lloyd could prove to be huge, and he should be ready from day one after already playing in Josh McDaniel’s system. Still, the Rams have proven their lack of ability on the offensive line, and DeMarcus Ware should wreak all kinds of havoc. That will end up being the difference in a game that will be much, much closer than it has any business being.

Green Bay at Minnesota (GB -9.5)

Jon: Green Bay (GB -9.5)
Prince: Green Bay (GB -9.5)

Not much to say here. Christian Ponder makes his first start and it comes at a very inopportune time. The Packers secondary has taken a lot of heat for allowing big yards this year, but it’s kind of understandable since the Packers always take huge early leads. What is the other team gonna do, run the clock out? While the yardage totals tell one story, their opponent QB Rating of just 82.0, good for 10th in the league, tells another. I’m not trying to say their pass defense is amazing, but it’s far more solid than it gets credit for, especially when you account for Drew Brees’ opening night rampage. Adding in the fact that they ranked #1 in opponents QB Rating in 2010, this should prove to be waaaaay too tall a task for Christian Ponder to handle in his first start. My guess is this one gets out of hand quick.

Indianapolis at New Orleans (NO -14)

Jon: New Orleans (NO -14)
Prince: New Orleans (NO -14)

Speaking of games getting out of hand quick, take a look at this gem of a Sunday Night game! The only question is how long New Orleans keeps its foot on the pedal, because there’s no doubt they dominate in this one. I’m taking the big line here because I think Painter will turn it over a bunch against the constant blitzing of Gregg Williams.

Baltimore at Jacksonville (BAL -8.5)

Jon: Baltimore (BAL -8.5)
Prince: Baltimore (BAL -8.5)

Well, at least I have Monday night free? That’s pretty much the only silver lining I can find here, as we’re left with yet another crap-fest in the biggest prime time spot of the week. Look, ESPN; you’re gonna need to start putting good games on at some point because, contrary to what you may believe, I don’t tune in to hear Jon Gruden praise every single person on the field and Ron Jaworski talk about “The National Football League.” I WANT GOOD FOOTBALL! This…well, this is kind of the opposite. As bad as Joe Flacco is, Blaine Gabbart is much, much worse. I wouldn’t be shocked if he set some sort of single game INT record in this one. No, seriously, I wouldn’t.


  1. so I know you were excited about the madden curse taking hold via illness, but I think the reality is more damning for the browns, and more interesting a development in the curse's history...the madden curse this year is being carried out by...surrender? I'm appalled at the lack of touches Hillis gets game in and game out...why they continue to let Hardesty drop passes when Hillis was 2nd on the team in reveiving last year?? I think I might be rooting for the fighting Josh Freeman's for the rest of the year.

  2. This is an epic Madden Curse year. Usually, the Curse confines itself to either injury or ineffectiveness, but the scope of damage thus far has been incredible. Never before have I seen a contract dispute, a random illness, complete and total ineffectiveness, loss of team trust, being phased out of the offense, and injury combined into one 6 week stretch. Honestly, I wouldn't be shocked if Hillis is struck with a rare, exotic illness and dies midseason.

  3. hahaha - you guys should take a look at the comment I just posted on Jon's Facebook wall. It hadn't hit me till I read this article today, but the 49ers have pretty much ruined RBs' seasons constantly this year (Lynch, Felix Jones, Blount, Best)... and guess who comes to town in week 8!!!! This could spell disaster... or in Madden terms, inevitability.

  4. In fairness, Felix Jones ruined his season by being on the field. The 49ers did all of us a huge favor by putting him out of his misery...albeit in a slow, delayed manner.

  5. Hahaha yeah, agreed. BTW, how you feeling now about your Raiders picks now that Palmer is apparently not starting after all? Like you said, QB isn't much of a factor in their offense anyway, but you gotta be a little worried about Kyle Boller, especially considering you had almost talked yourself into picking KC to begin with!

    In other news, I can't tell you how sad I am that Jarvaris won't be starting anymore this season... I was fully intent on seeing him burn you all 16 weeks this season! As it is, if he's done for good, at least we can officially say he was a perfect 5-0 against you. I can live with that.

  6. Terrified of Boller...he's just so bad. I picked Oakland on the assumption Carson would start. With the situation, it was kind of a tough place for people picking early in the week.

    I hate Tarvaris. He's a killer.

  7. of course they bench him against the browns...if anybody needs a win handed to us, it's us, seeing as how we've handed 2 games away this year already...

  8. for the record, I literally gouged my eyes out with a drinking straw in the third quarter of the Browns' game today...I've never been more disgusted with a win in my life...

  9. touche...actually, that huge fat guy who blocked 2 FG's then got ejected for headbutting Alex Smith won because he got to leave early.

  10. Jon: The Tarvaris curse lives on!!! I motion to continue monitoring your record picking Seahawks games against the spread, on grounds that Tarvaris' ghost will forever haunt these picks of yours until he's officially been exiled to the CFL. (Wait, what's that? The CFL doesn't want him either? Sucks for you!)

    Bloomy: don't you mean you've had 2 games handed away TO you this year?!?! (wait... make that 3!) It is every bit as pathetic as it looks that your only 3 wins now come in narrow games against the league's 2 very worst teams, Miami and Indianapolis, and then a 6-3 win against Tarvaris Jackson's backup. Has there ever been a cheaper 3-3 record in the history of the NFL? I eagerly await your response somehow arguing that the Browns are still underrated and merely unlucky.

  11. Wow, when you put it that way...Miami, Indy, Seattle. Cleveland really missed the boat on the whole Suck for Luck thing!

    And yes, Seattle is pretty much a curse upon me. I need to find some way to have them contracted...and soon.

  12. Also, the Browns literally were gifted the Seahawks game by a horrible blocking in the back call on Leon Washington's punt return for TD. It was seriously one of the worst calls I've ever seen in my life!

  13. Casey, I don't know if you read anything I've written about the Browns this year, but it's been more or less entirely negative...the Browns giving away games is not a statement of luck, but rather of a lack of execution...they gave up 14 points to the raiders on a kickoff return and a fake field goal and allowed huge TD on a quick snap play against Cincy...those are both mental/effort errors-not a lack of me, I know full well the Browns are bad-you would see that if you read this whole comment thread-the point is, if they would have played with their heads on straight, they would EASILY be the cheapest 5-1 in the NFL right now.

  14. and yeah, Jon-that call was terrible, but I felt a little vindicated by it for having to listen to Jim Mora for the whole game.

  15. also casey, how were the indy and miami games handed to the browns? I'm willing to guess you didn't watch the games to see Colt put together the 4th quarter drive to beat miami or the browns defense (which, I believe is rated 6th in total defense) give the offense the chance to beat indy. comeback wins and being handed a win are two different things-the browns won neither of those two games by fluke plays. They are still bad, but, as you said, indy and miami are worse.

  16. Doesn't the fact that they got to play both Indy and Miami mean they were "handed" two wins? Just saying!

  17. I agree with most of what you said Bloomy, but you can't point at the Raiders kickoff return TD and say they "gave that away." They're in the bottom third of the league in both kickoff return and punt return average allowed, so I think it's safe to say that they just aren't very good in that area.

  18. So...are we going to hear this argument every year about how the Browns should have 13-14 wins when they only get 6?

  19. That depends...if I'm talking as a fan, think they should win every game...If I'm being realistic, then no. I try to be pretty realistic on here, though I'll give Jon that they're bad enough on special teams that I probably shouldn't call the TD return a "giveaway" play....frustrating beyond belief, but I guess not entirely unforeseen.

  20. This comment has been removed by the author.

  21. Well bloomy, since you asked...why do fans have to be irrationally stupid and not realistic? Are Landrum and I not fans of our teams because we pick them to lose? Fans can want, and hope for their team to win, but to think that a bad team should go undefeated is dumb. When you post from now on could you please begin by letting us know if the comment is coming from the fan side of you, or what you call the realistic side?

  22. As a fan, do you get mad at the vikings for making bad plays? When Ponder makes bad throws, as rookies inevitably do, is your gut reaction to go, "OK, he's a rookie, things like this happen," or is it only after you remove yourself from the situation that you acknowledge the reality of a rookie making rookie mistakes? I've watched vikings games with you, a I've seen objects thrown, so I'm leaning towards thinking you know what I mean. Our proficiency in analyzing our teams is our ability to remove ourselves from the situation as fans. As I said, on here, I do my best to comment from a neutral standpoint, but, admittedly, sometimes being a fan can get the better of me. I think if any of us here are honest, we will admit the same.

  23. I fail to see how you addressed what I wrote. Getting mad at my team for doing something dumb does not mean that I think they will win, or that they are the better team. You are saying that you think the Browns will win every game, which is ridiculous. They are bad. Even if they were incredibly talented, they still barely have any hope of winning all their games. I have never, in my life, thought that one of my teams would win every game. As a fan of my team I like to think that I know them pretty well, and I have certain expectations for them. This year I knew that they were going to suck, and that's what we predicted. I really wish that you could have seen my reactions to Ponder's interceptions, because I really wasn't angry. It's exactly what I expected from him, and I have said that numerous times.

    I don't understand why you think there are two completely different parts in someone's brain for being a fan, and a rational person. I'm not one minute a Vikings fan and then the next unbiased. I am 100% a fan of my team all year round. Whether it's during a game, or in the offseason, I want what's best for my team. What I want is for them to never lose again(which I think is what all fans want), but what I think will happen this year is far below that. So, like what I was hinting to in my previous post, I am fine with you wanting your team to do well(you should or else you wouldn't be a fan) but what you want and what you think will happen are two very different things.

  24. Probably the best part of this whole comment thread: notice how Prince's last comment was made at 2:28am on a Wednesday night! Well done, Prince. I would be a zombie at work if I lived like you!

  25. I said nothing about thinking the browns would win every game. As a fan, though, I don't watch a 101 yard kickoff return for a touchdown and respond with "oh, they did their best," I'm mad because I believe that shouldn't happen. Being mad at dumb plays implies that you also believe those plays shouldn't happen. The difference is not that there are two people in your brain who can't coexist-it's that you choose different lenses through which to view a situation, and when I'm watching the game, I suspend the reality that the browns are bad and play the part of the starry-eyed supporter. I would contend, and correct me if I'm entirely off base Landrum, that this is partly the reason for the on again-off again relationship with Tony Romo. In your mind, you know that Romo can't handle late game pressure situations, yet as a cowboys fan, you hope and believe that they can overcome their own weaknesses to win.

  26. and as for your initial question, I would pick the browns to lose 9-10 games this year, so no-that doesn't disqualify one from being a fan. The same thing applies to football game as to movies. When we act as a fan, we engage in willing suspension of disbelief. An example of this is Inception-it was a great movie because we chose to set aside our belief that we cannot actually inhabit someone else's dreams in order t become absorbed in the story. In the same way, I choose to set aside my belief that the browns receivers cannot get open against quality DB's and get mad at them for never being open. I set aside my belief that our 3rd string right guard can't stop any quality defensive lineman and get frustrated watching Colt run around for his life. The moment the ball is snapped, I would say all fans set aside a part of their knowledge in order to become immersed in the game.

  27. I think you're off-base here, Bloomy. There is a huge difference in "hoping and believing" and "suspending reality." I NEVER suspend reality when watching sports. Why would I want to be anything less than honest to myself about what my team is and what is likely to happen.

    Sure, I desperately want Romo to find some sort of redemption for all his late game woes, but I have no real hope of that happening. Prince has watched enough games with me to know that I'm 100% in touch with reality during a game. I'm aware of Romo's issues, thus I EXPECT him to screw up in the 4th quarter. It's a shock when he doesn't! I know the offensive line is bad, thus I EXPECT rushers to pour through and kill Romo. I know the secondary is bad, thus I EXPECT good QB's to pick us apart. Am I mad or frustrated when this happens? Of course! I don't WANT my team to struggle, but that doesn't mean I willingly shut off my knowledge of their weaknesses.

    I disagree fundamentally with your assertion that being a fan brings about a willing suspension of disbelief. To me, that only equates to an uninformed fan. Being a fan of team is almost like a marriage. You love this other person unconditionally, you support them constantly, you spend a lot of time with them, you know their strengths, you know their weaknesses, and you continually seek to know more about them. When I watch a Cowboys game (or Kentucky or the Celtics...), I go into it with my eyes wide open, knowing exactly where things stand. If you close off reality, then what are you really watching? How can you really process what happens? How can you learn more about your team?

  28. Now, I completely believe what I said about 2 parts to your brain. This even seems like I might be talking to two different people. In one post you write "if I'm talking as a fan, [I] think they should win every game" then 2 comments later you say "I said nothing about thinking the Browns would win every game." So, I don't even know what to say.

    Also, 101 yard kick off returns are a part of the game. Bad plays happen in every game, every week. Do you remember a guy named Josh Cribbs? Didn't he get paid because he is good on special teams? I'm sure that when he brings back a kick for a TD that you sit there and think, as you said before, that the play shouldn't have happened.

  29. You don't see the difference between should and would? Let's look at tennis...during the height of his dominance, there was no match on paper where you would say, "roger federal should lose this match," but it is still incredibly hard for a tennis player to have an undefeated year. I know that the browns aren't dominant at all...even good...but when the ball is snapped, I believe our corners should cover, our D line should block, and our linebackers should fill run gaps. the moment the whistle is blown, I can acknowledge reality that they can't play with superior players, but in the heat of the moment I think we all choose to believe our team can win. This is why fans stick with bad teams for so long...they may know that mike brown will aggressively snuff out all chance of competence, but they watch their team rooting against reality. I think you're right, Jon, that it's like a marriage, only probably healthier than a lot of NFL fans' marriages... We may know our partner's weaknesses, but we choose to believe they can overcome them against all odds. We hold our knowledge to cushion us from the hurt of disappointment, but still allow ourselves to believe that they can very the odds.

  30. *defy the odds... My phone hated me there...

  31. Ok, I can't sleep, but I think I've come up with the easy way to explain this. (and yes I realize that earlier I said a D line should block when I meant to say get OFF blocks) have you ever gotten mad at your team, then cooled down and realized that another team's player just made a great play? (yes) why did you get mad in the first place? You allow your emotions to override logic... Emotion is what makes fans's not logical to wear no shirt and paint your chest in green bay in Dec, but they do it to add to the thrill of the game.

  32. That explanation does nothing for me. I'm fully aware of my teams weaknesses and I don't blind myself to them nor do I make excuses for them. I get mad because I want my team to win, but that doesn't mean I'm expecting everything to go perfectly. That's ridiculous. I know my team, I root for my team through everything, but I know what to realistically expect on the field.

  33. you get mad because you want them to win...but they're not in a game where you think they don't have the talent to beat the other team, you get mad because you want them to win and they're you're angry at them for not doing what you don't think they can do...and my definition is a stupid irrational fan?? Look, I agree with you guys 100% that we acknowledge the weaknesses of our teams, I'm not talking about the time in between plays when we're analyzing what's going on. What I'm saying is that during the play, while the ball is in action, we choose to ignore the weaknesses we know exist and expect (just for those few seconds) our players to perform. I think you guys are taking my view as me believing that the browns are always the best team on the field. That's not the case at all-I'm talking about tiny snapshots within the game-the emotional/adrenaline part. No matter how you shake it, getting mad at a worse team for losing is irrational-the question is whether or not you acknowledge it.

  34. Let me try this one more time...perhaps it will sink in. I DO NOT IGNORE MY TEAMS WEAKNESSES AT ANY POINT IN THE GAME!!! Are we clear on that? There is nothing irrational at hating losing...quite the opposite. Doesn't mean I'm out of touch with reality, it just means I'm competitive. Also, I get mad at my team for losing because THEY ARE BETTER!The Cowboys should not be losing with 24 point leads in the second half. Also, considering their talent, they shouldn't be losing much at all.

  35. You've never picked against the cowboys, then gotten mad during the game? You've never been angry at an interception, then realized a defender made a great play? Call me jaded, but I'd say that's total BS. You never "suspend reality" (your term-not mine), what you suspend is your disbelief in your team's ability to perform. If giving up 101 yard kickoff returns is part of the game, then so is maintaining your level of play for 4 quarters, and if the cowboys can't do that, then they absolutely should blow leads, but thank you for illustrating my point.

  36. Yes because my expectation of a super-talented team playing up to their talent level is exactly the same as your idiotic and delusional expectation of a crappy Browns team winning every game. By the way, I picked against the Cowboys this week and I didn't get mad once during the game. Because I expected it to happen. What's BS is your entire argument and the fact that you stubbornly refuse to listen to a word I say. YOU started down the path of "suspending reality." It's laughable that you called it my term when you're the one that started using it! You watch your games how you want, nobody is begrudging you that. But this insistence that I shut off the real world and treat my team like a 3 year old is really getting me upset. I KNOW MY TEAM! I DON'T IGNORE THEIR WEAKNESSES! I TAKE A REALISTIC APPROACH INTO EVERY GAME! I wasn't mad when the Patriots drove down the field to win, because I knew it would happen. If you listened to the podcast, then you know that's correct. I wasn't mad about last night's game, because I knew it would happen. You can call and ask my wife if you want. I understand my team and I refuse to make crappy excuses for why they suck. Don't accuse me otherwise.

  37. my post...what I said from the beginning is what I just repeated-I never said that one "suspends reality." THAT would be stupid-read it again because I don't feel like typing it again. I've listened to everything you said-disagreeing and not hearing are two very different things. I don't make excuses for my browns losing-in fact, this post started with me dogging the browns twice-once for being stupid and once for winning the worst game I've ever watched. The one ignoring statements is you-have you ever gotten mad at an interception that turned out to be a great play by a defender? "Also, I get mad at my team for losing because THEY ARE BETTER!The Cowboys should not be losing with 24 point leads in the second half." This tells me that you did get mad when a young, talented lions team with a solid quarterback and arguably the best receiver in football scored on the cowboys while a STOUT defensive line was able to keep the lions in the game while Tony Romo (who you've admitted can't play in pressure situations) throws two INT's for TD's...Like I said from the beginning, there's nothing wrong with being an informed fan-I think all of us here aim to do just that, but it's the emotion that makes us GOOD fans. Sometimes that means jeering an official for a call you know was right just so it might influence another call later in the game. You tell me, as an athlete playing in front of a crowd, would you prefer fans who are always correct, or fans who will try their best to swing the odds in your favor? (see Seahawks, Seattle-2010)

  38. "The difference is not that there are two people in your brain who can't coexist-it's that you choose different lenses through which to view a situation, and when I'm watching the game, I suspend the reality that the browns are bad and play the part of the starry-eyed supporter."

    This is a direct quote from you said "suspend reality." You just called yourself stupid. Thank you.

    Throw in the fact that you just admitted to being willfully dumb about bad calls, and I'd say you've pretty much proven Prince's earlier point.

  39. Also, I think it's funny that you "disagree" with me. What is there to disagree about?!?!? We're talking about personal preference!!! You brought me into this conversation with your presumptuous comments on how you think I watch my team. You were wrong, and your misguided insistence that you know how I consume my sports is about as arrogant as I've ever seen. You go ahead and continue cheering for your Super Bowl champion Browns, and I'll continue watching real football.

  40. 1-you took me referring to ONE reality-the browns are bad. I was talking about playing a role. The categorical statement that I made was about suspending disbelief.

    2-my degree is in looking at how we think and take in information, so maybe it's possible that I know something about how we process information. Maybe it's possible that you haven't looked at your relationship with sports in a scientific manner.

    3-I've heard you refer to yourself as a "homer" on this very site multiple times when analyzing sports. Why say that if it has no bearing on your opinions?

    4-you once again ignored my questions about getting mad at your team when you shouldn't.

    Finally, arrogance isn't illustrated by using an example to support a universal concept, but it could be seen when one starts many podcasts by calling oneself an idiot, but then rejecting outright any idea other than ones own.

  41. Also, have you ever seen any of the great NBA coaches barking about calls during the game knowing that they might influence a call in their favor in a crucial point later? But I guess they're all dumb too.

  42. Let me tell you what is arrogant, Bloomy. You saying that your degree from a crappy college gives you some insight into how I process information. THAT is arrogant. Ironically, I have a similar degree from that same college...and it took me 2 less years to get it! I guess I'm MORE qualified to comment on this subject then, according to your rationale!

    You can make whatever dumb points you want, but you have no idea how I consume sports. To say otherwise is presumptuous and arrogant. I'm honest and realistic about my teams, as anybody can tell you. If you don't want to watch the Browns that way, then fine. I don't care. But don't insist that everyone watches sports in the same way. You sound like a giant tool when you do that.

    Since you have thus far shown no willingness or ability to listen to people, I'm going to assume that will be the case again. Given that, I'm not going to waste another second arguing with you. I already have a 2 year old at home that tests my patience with illogical rants, so I really don't want to deal with the same thing on here.

  43. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  44. Yes, really. You put something totally stupid and utterly false on here and its gonna get deleted. You started down this path and your assertion that you have some sort of insight into how I watch sports is laughable at best. Opinion and debate are definitely valued, but I'm not going to sit here and listen to some sort of BS lecture, from you of all people, about how I should and should not watch sports. I will continue to enjoy my sports exactly the way I always have, your "insight" be damned.

  45. Landrum, you should have just stopped responding after you said you were done. There is obviously no point in trying to reason with a delusional fan, and that's why I stopped days ago. I know that you try to respond to everyone (which is really good in theory), but honestly not everyone deserves a response. When people continually prove that their opinion is wrong then why should it be respected? Why should you respond to someone who tells you that they know what you are thinking, and how you react, even though they aren't with you, and honestly don't know you very well? Then when you disagree, he says that your argument is BS. Why keep responding when you take direct quotes from someone's argument to show how he called himself stupid, then he just says that you misunderstood? That is BS. Since you started this website you have been very honest about your knowledge of sports. You obviously have your own opinions, and will stand by them until proven wrong. Sometimes that is the case, and you have acknowledged being wrong in podcast and posts. Unfortunately, not everyone is able to admit mistakes.

    Remember when OSU had that very first press conference about the NCAA allegations and we said that Tressel would be gone? I remember, and I'm sure you do too, that someone said we were stupid and it would never happen. Remember last year when someone said that the Browns would be 10-2 if they fired Mangini? Do we really even need to respond to that? Remember last year when someone said after the OSU loss to Wisconsin that OSU was missing 3 key defensive players which would have made the game completely different? Remember how we argued, and the person refused to believe every argument we made? Remember how we were called blind, how the person said that he was using evidence and facts to support his arguments, and that we were alienating him? Then we found out that the players he claimed didn't play actually did and recorded stats, and that the guy arguing didn't even watch most of the game. Unlike you, there was no admissions of a mistake at the end of the argument, just us posting a link to the game along with their stats, and the person not really responding. (This last one seems eerily similar to what's going on with these comments.)

    So Landrum, do you know what all of these arguments have in common(actually I bet you do)? They all came from the same person your are arguing with now. The same person who has, once again, arrogantly said that you don't know what you're talking about, and expects you to just sit there and respectfully agree with his opinion, without question. Do yourself a favor and just stop responding, you won't be able to during Weekend of Glory anyway.

  46. Wow, Bloomy! For the first time in this entire discussion, you were actually right! I AM going to delete your comment! Not only that, but I banned you from commenting, period.

  47. Bloomy, dude... listen, I love you, man, I really do. I'm just asking you to take a few deep breaths, sit on this for a few days, and really try to think about this whole thing. Play it cool, man. No one here is trying to alienate you. As I read back over all this, it really does seem clear that you brought Landrum into this and pressed him into a defensive position.

    And dude, seriously, bragging about a [you-know-where] College degree? HAHAHAHAHAHAHA! BTW, guess which one of us has an actual STATISTICS DEGREE from that SAME college? (Also in 4 years, like Landrum and Price, not 6). So just take it easy, regroup, and maybe we'll all be able to have some fun debate again someday soon.