Fan Focus: Etiquette on the Road - Part one

Fan Focus: Etiquette on the Road - Part one
by Dan Salem and Todd Salem (9-9-13)



DAN:
With the height of baseball season colliding perfectly with the start of the NFL calendar, let's take a long hard look at the fans for a moment. Fan Focus, telling you how not to be an ass for over ten years (length of time may be embellished).

Today I want to talk about stadium / ball park / arena etiquette. And not for the home crowd. They basically get to do whatever the hell they want. Its their team, their turf and their rules. I'm talking about watching your team play on the road, in the enemies backyard. Their are rules people and things to avoid so as not to get stabbed.

Do you have much experience with seeing your teams on the road? I've been watching the Yankees play the Angels out here in Anaheim for eight years running. Its an incredibly delightful experience and nothing like when I went to watch my New York Jets play the Patriots in Foxboro. I've seen the Celtics here in Los Angeles play the Clippers as well. Each sport is slightly different, but the rules don't change.

I'll start with rule number one and you can call me an idiot for bringing this up and give me rule number two.

First rule of fandom on the road; sit on the visiting side of the field. For baseball this is pretty easy to do, but with football its much greyer. My experience watching the Jets in New England brought me face to face with the roudy drunk Masshole Pats fan. I was in the upper deck, around plenty of Jets fans, but far outnumbered none the less. I wore a Jets hat, but nothing else. I felt that was respectful. Gotta show team spirit, but no need to rub it in on the road. But when I cheered on my team I found myself all too close to several fights, with beer thrown in my general direction. It was cold outside, bitter cold, too cold to tell if the beer actually hit me. Stupid bleeping Patriots fans.


TODD:
Road fan etiquette, as you hinted at, has almost nothing to do with the actions of the specific road fan. It has everything to do with the home environment the actions are taking place in. As you said, you got heckled and harassed just for wearing a Jets hat in Gillette Stadium. We hear stories of fans getting beaten up and sent to the hospital seemingly every season just for being fans of the opposing team. Perhaps those certain people were rowdy and inciting anger from the home crowd, but that is still no reason to cripple someone. I think no matter the actions, it is dangerous to be an opposing fan in certain locales. That is just the sad state of present sports fandom.

So first rule of road fan etiquette altered: only be an opposing fan in weak home parks, i.e. Atlanta basketball, Jacksonville football, etc. This way, not only will the crowd as a whole be sparse, but the likelihood of home fans rallying up enough to cause you fear or harm is limited.

The ironic part is these types of crowds are considered bad fan bases. You glossed over home crowd responsibility, but I want to go back to that. Home crowds have some etiquette of their own. The obvious ones exist:

- Don't cheer loudly at a home football game when your team is on offense
- Don't start a wave at a baseball game; it makes your fans look disinterested and childish
- Don't yell randomly when your basketball team is shooting free throws

These are the easy ones. The grey area that most often comes up for home crowds though, for collegiate sports at least, is when to charge the field/court. When is it okay to leap from the stands onto the playing field after a victory? If you topple the number one team in the country, this seems warranted. But what if you are the number eight team in the country? Does it not then seem a bit silly?

This has been dissected before on other platforms, but I am never quite content with the results. What should be the requirements for when a home, collegiate crowd can rush the court?


DAN:
Way to skip rule number two and jump right on the home team. But I LOVE that you brought up the wave as a major red flag for home teams. This ties nicely into my second rule.

The second rule for road fans; go watch your team in a fan friendly venue. One of my absolute favorite spots to go watch the Yankees is at Angels' Stadium in Anaheim. Angels' fans are really great, nice, inviting and just positive all around. They have the Rally Monkey and home run fireworks, but aren't dicks about you cheering for the opposition. Plus, when the Yankees are in town the stadium is at least 1/3 full of Yankees fans. Win!

But guess what else happens ALL the TIME in Angels' stadium? The wave! They do the wave a ton in that ballpark. Granted its practically at Disney Land so being childish is not unexpected. But they love the wave and I love visiting that ballpark.

Now to the hard question. What are the rules for rushing the court, storming the field, rushing the mound? I have only two.

[Part two - Storming the Court]

NFL Kickoff: Off season questions 'Tebow vs Hernandez' - Part two

NFL Kickoff: Off season questions 'Tebow vs. Hernandez' - Part two
by Dan Salem and Todd Salem (8-9-13)

[Part one - Questions both Real and Hilarious]



TODD:
Besides going global and dealing with what to call itself, the NFL is also interested in expanding the schedule, playing 18 games. There has even been discussion about playoff expansion. This is ludicrous but if it makes more money, it cannot be ruled out. Which brings us past saturation and back to safety concerns. More games and more high-leverage games means more injuries. I agree though that the game is infinitely safer than even a decade ago. And the equipment is continually being improved upon each and every season. I suppose eventually we will reach a point where the injuries have been curtailed enough to be worth the destructive excitement the sport brings. We are not quite at that point yet though.

I'm not even going to touch that "appeasing the women" comment. Let's just move on to my other NFL questions.


DAN:
Give the foreign fans some credit. They'll call it American Football, or simply the NFL. When you talk about soccer internationally, you usually reference the league, not the sport. The real solution however is for everyone to actually pronounce Futbol as its written and use the accent when they say it. Then its easy to hear the difference. Football. Futbol.

Before I dive into your "Fan" questions, the real off season topics of inquiry, you better promise to answer them yourself. I'm sure I'll have followup questions, ahem, the New York Giants defense, but no cop outs. I need answers!

You asked:
(1) From a pure popularity standpoint, as in most interest by the most people, which New England story was actually bigger news, Aaron Hernandez or Tim Tebow?

I wish I could tell you it was Tim Tebow, but from both a New England fans standpoint and from a national standpoint the Hernandez story is infinitely bigger. Initially, when the Hernandez story first broke, it looked like maybe, just maybe, things were getting blown out of proportion. There were a few days when murder was not part of the discussion and him simply missing six games or the season was all this was. At that point in time, Tebow vs. Hernandez was a conversation. Once murder joined the party this was no longer a far fight between news stories. Murder captures headlines and ends careers. It has certainly ended Hernandez's and now the Patriots have a gaping hole in their lineup.

For most teams the loss of a tight end hurts, but is fixable. Take the New York Jets for example. They "lost" Dustin Keller in free agency and promptly signed a veteran replacement in Kellen Winslow. Savy team decision. But the Patriots, their tight ends have been another teams wide receivers of late. Tom Brady's offense thrives on the short game and throwing over the middle to large targets. Now Hernandez is gone, Gronk is out indefinitely it seems, and the Jets already stole the veteran talent in Winslow whom the Patriots would have gotten in years past. This is trouble.

I now have to talk Tim Tebow for a moment or three. This signing should be bigger news, should be more fun and crazy. I enjoyed over a year and a half of Tebow talk when he was on the Jets. Should they have given him an opportunity to start? Yeah, of course. The team sucked last season and had nothing to lose. Hell, I don't think he would have done anything remotely close to the "Butt Fumble" and would have added much needed excitement to a turnover plagued season. But good riddance! He was a distraction and proved less than an asset since the Jets were not going to play him. Having such a huge personality on the team is great if you use him and is annoying if you don't.

Watch out Patriots. No, there won't be chants for Tebow if Tom Brady has a bad game. I'm not sure he's ever put up more than a poor half of football in his professional life. But there WILL be chants for Tim Tebow. Tebow the tight end, with Hernandez and Gronk out. Tebow the wide receiver or Tebow the running back, with question marks across the line of scrimmage at both positions. Tebow the number two quarterback, if and when he falls to third on their depth chart. The Patriots are blowing out the Dolphins with six minutes to go in the game? Put in Tim Tebow you'll here. I say, please oh please play him! Let him ride the bench to your own peril.


TODD:
Having people actually pronounce things as they are supposed to be said seems like wide eyed naivete, but go ahead and dream.

As for the Patriots off season, obviously the Aaron Hernandez story grew to be a huge deal; perhaps the biggest in NFL history based on the facts. This is an active player who has been accused of murder. O.J. Simpson is the only comparable event and, although he was much more famous than Hernandez ever was, he was already retired when his murder charges were brought on. This is an ACTIVE player...just insane. It dwarfs anything related to Tebow. My question, as the days passed, became more and more one-sided.

But even without the Hernandez story gaining steam as details were unearthed, I actually think New England was partly responsible for Tebow-mania not taking off. They kept him under wraps rather than pushing him to the forefront like a certain New York squad. Did they even hold a press conference when he was signed? Nope. Whereas the Jets did everything but buy advertising time on Fox Sports New York when they brought Tim to their team. Just different mindsets for different franchises. I wouldn't be surprised if Tebow barely plays at all, at any position, for New England, tight end deficiency or not. This just does not seem like the type of franchise that would throw him out there for the sake of it, especially a player like him who (reportedly/apparently) has so much trouble learning plays and responsibilities.

And now with news that Jake Ballard may not even make the final roster because of lingering injury concerns, New England might forget about using the tight end position at all. I had high hopes for Ballard becoming the Patriots' main guy at the spot and having himself a pretty solid season, if unspectacular compared to the likes of Hernandez and Gronkowski. But with that, yet another option that may not come to fruition for the Pats, it may be time to play more running backs and wide receivers. I don't know where else they would turn.

Let's move on though before this becomes an all AFC East blog entry. My next question was in regards to using kickers in fantasy football. Sensible players and experts are aware that, essentially, every kicker is the same. Their point production is perfectly unpredictable from one season to the next. A kicker with a career high in successful kicks has no better chance at repeating that outcome than one who struggled the previous season, assuming the latter still holds a job of course. The stats back this up.

[If you missed Part one - Off season questions Real and Hilarious]

[Part three - The fantasy kicker & Barry Sanders]
[Part four - A QB decathlon, rookies & the NY Giants]

NFL Kickoff: Off season questions Real & Hilarious - Part one

NFL Kickoff: Off season questions Real & Hilarious - Part one
by Dan Salem and Todd Salem (8-5-13)



TODD:
The NFL is perfecting its takeover of the entire calendar year. We start with training camp and preseason in August through to the regular season and playoffs. The Super Bowl is played in February. From there comes free agency, player movement and draft talk through April-May. After that is finalization of rosters, more player movement and preseason news through the summer. Parts of this takeover are more fun (the NFC West royalty) than others (the Aaron Hernandez story). But either way, the National Football League now lasts 12 months a year.

With that preamble out of the way, let's dive into a myriad of questions that currently surround the league.

First, and possibly most importantly, with concussion research and player safety in the front of everyone's mind, is it realistic that this league eventually folds, AKA no longer exists, like some people have opined? Perhaps not in the next decade, but in our lifetime is there ever not going to be an NFL?

On a smaller scale, we can get into who will win the Super Bowl, what happens to the Patriots offense, who's the surprise team of the year and the biggest disappointment, etc. But those aren't the questions people are clambering for. Not yet at least. Here's what fans are really wondering:

(1) From a pure popularity standpoint, as in most interest by the most people, which New England story was actually bigger news, Aaron Hernandez or Tim Tebow?

(2) Is this finally the year fantasy football leagues realize using a kicker as a scoring position is almost entirely irrelevant and luck-based?

(3) If Barry Sanders came out of retirement today, could he be the starting running back for the New York Jets?

(4) If Russell Wilson, Andrew Luck, Colin Kaepernick and Robert Griffin III played 2 on 2 in a decathalon-type event, what would the teams be, which side would win, who would America be rooting for, and would they all be immediately inducted into the respective Halls of Fame of each sport they participated in?

(4b) How much does it suck for all current and future first year starting quarterbacks?

(5) Do the New York Giants actually eschew the linebacker position entirely this season and go with an unconventional 5-0-6 alignment? ...Huh, oh, no one is actually wondering this other than me?


DAN:
Whoa, whoa, whoa, someone just exploded a four part NFL debate in my face! I see six valid questions and one that is complete horse manure.

A thought on your preamble, the NFL is definitely expanding itself across all twelve months of the calendar and there is no better time for this to happen. Its popularity couldn't be higher and the potential for making money is still growing. Yet I worry for the league, and not because of the concussion issue which I'll get to in a minute. I worry because too much of a good thing is a cliche for a reason. If you eat too much ice cream you get a brain freeze and swear off it for a week. If you drink too much you puke, wake up with a hang over and wish you never knew what alcohol was. My point, we as Americans are reaching a saturation point with football. Its not just the NFL, but college football in conjunction with the NFL is inescapable.

There will be a breaking point, a moment in time where each fan says "Enough!" I can't take anymore football and need a break. Sports were built this way to start out. You had an off season with few to no stories to tell, so by the time training camp came around you were clamoring for some football or baseball or what not. Expanding to twelve uninterrupted months of football news and notes and crap involving the legal system is dangerous territory. ESPN and the like need things to talk about, I get it, and the NFL can still make more money. I get that too. But I worry, will enough be enough or will it never be enough?

How about that first question. The league is not going to fold. That's completely unrealistic. Sports are a part of American culture and football is at the forefront. It has been our entire lives. Our father's generation had baseball in the lead and our kid's generation might have the NBA, if trends continue. But the major sports are staying put in our society. No one is shutting down or boycotting the NFL and the game will get safer. Hell, its infinitely safer then when I played in high school. Rules alone, not to mention equipment, make it harder to get seriously injured. Plus, more importantly, there is something about men that makes them want to inflict pain on one another. I'm not saying we want to injure other men, just bruise them and push them around a bit. It's why boxing gyms are so popular, even if the sport has leveled off. Its also why MMA has blown up. The NFL is like Mixed Martial Arts with a full body suit and too many rules to count. Plus, hold onto this ball. Men love this! We aren't letting it go, just allowing it to change to appease the women of the world.

I'd like to issue a half apology in advance for being semi-sexist. Just covering my bases.


TODD:
The saturation point seems far off with the way things are transpiring, but certain actions are on the horizon that may expedite this process. Expanding the league into other countries, which already happens once a year, is going to get kicked up a notch. Multiple games will be played overseas. There may even be a franchise located in a country outside of North America. So not only will American football be a full-year sport in America but in other parts of the world as well.

On a side note, if the NFL expands past Europe and into Latin speaking countries, I'm not quite sure what they will call it. Futbol is already taken and we know first hand how confusing it is when soccer fans call soccer futbol here in the states.

[Part two - Off season questions 'Tebow vs. Hernandez']
[Part three - The fantasy kicker & Barry Sanders] 
[Part four - A QB decathlon, rookies & the NY Giants]

NFL Draft 2013: Losers, there are Always Losers - Part two

NFL Draft 2013: Losers, there are Always Losers - Part two
by Dan Salem and Todd Salem (5-3-13)

[Part one - We're all winners Here]



DAN:
I'm pulling out my stick and approaching with caution. Not to poke a sleeping giant, at least not too hard, but did the Patriots forget to show up at the draft? Watching them lose the weekend only made me feel better about the Jets. This could prove to be the AFC East's biggest win overall.


TODD:
The New England Patriots definitely left their fans wanting more. They traded away yet another first round pick. It is hard to make news, good or bad, without selecting someone until pick number 52. Also, I feel like Bill Belichick and company have been getting a bit of a pass here recently. They have not been good at drafting, dare I say awful at it, especially on the defensive side of the ball. Perhaps last year and this year were the beginning of a change back to the early aughts, but New England has been receiving an undeserved benefit of the doubt in this regard for years now.

I don't think the rest of the AFC East outpaced them as much as you hint at though. Miami's draft was so-so; their trade up to number 3 to nab Dion Jordan was filled with questions and few answers. The Jets really disappointed me after their nice day one. If you believe in Geno Smith, you take him in round one. If you don't believe in him as a franchise quarterback, then why take him at all? In my mind, they wasted their second round selection. Whereas the Giants drafted a quarterback because his value was too good to pass up, they at least already have the position filled. The Smith pick was low on risk in round two so there was value there, but they are obviously not sold on his ability to start for them or he wouldn't have lasted until pick 39.

The other reason New England isn't looking so bad is because Buffalo is looking worse. What are the Bills doing exactly? They made a shrewd move to drop from 8 to 16 but then took a player who had no business going at 16. Buffalo's brass must have been kicking themselves when we got to day three and they saw what quarterbacks were still on the board. I like Robert Woods and think he will be a solid pro wide out; I am not sure about much else they did though. They drafted a kicker for god's sake! If EJ Manuel pans out, this will all be moot. I just didn't think he was worthy of where he was selected and the deck sure is stacked against him having early season success.

Did anyone have a worse draft than the members of the AFC East? What a coincidental shit show.


DAN:
Hold on a second! Are you for real, Buffalo drafted a kicker? How did I miss this? That would've been my top headline if I ran ESPN and would go like this:  

"Buffalo Bills punish fans by drafting a kicker - In one of the coldest climates of any NFL team, where kicking is deemed foolish in general, the Bills wasted everyone's time by adding a kicker to their roster on draft day."

I'm completely on board with the AFC shit show, minus the Jets. I disagree fully with your poor analysis of where they selected Geno Smith. He was not guaranteed first round talent, had too many question marks and brought too much pressure and speculation as a first round pick. The Jets got two good years and two bad years out of their last first round quarterback and were not about to let history repeat itself. As a second rounder, Geno Smith will meet all expectations. Namely, I have none for him. I hope he is good enough to win the starting job by 2014, but the main objective of drafting him, besides taking the best player available at a position of need, was to put pressure on the current Jet quarterbacks to actually improve. Mark Sanchez is not a lost cause. He sucked last season and needed a reason to get better. Last year Mark knew he had the job, let it go to his head as everyone gave Tebow the attention, and then crumbled as the team fell apart. Now he has real incentive. The Jets were smart in creating that and here's hoping he makes something of himself.

To the actual AFC East shit showing at the draft, what happened? I mean the Patriots have been the best team in the division for a long time now, and even with poor drafts they have managed to fill their holes year after year. I'm not sure they improved at all at the draft, but they didn't have to. Buffalo always amazes me with their ability to suck. I actually like the EJ Manuel pick in general, but not at 16. I would have wanted the Jets to grab him in the early second round, so maybe that's why they nabbed him, I'm not sure. He impressed me when he made the rounds at ESPN, but why cut Ryan Fitzpatrick if you are planning to draft a rookie quarterback? I would allow the Harvard graduate to mentor the new kid, not toss him aside like a piece of trash. And did Miami attend the draft? I honestly don't know. With rumors of them signing Tim Tebow, its like the Bills, Dolphins and Jets all got together and decided to make huge fools of themselves so that the Patriots still look like a dominant team and the division is relevant.

Having said all that, none of the AFC East teams were the biggest loser. That honor belongs to the sorry folks who call themselves Chiefs fans. Most years their team is just competitive enough to not make the playoffs. But no matter, the biggest losers of the draft were by far Kansas City Chiefs fans.

The Chiefs stunk last season and the only consolation for their fans was the first pick of the draft. Wooo first pick! Oh wait, I'm sorry, but there is no skill position player worthy of that pick. You now have an extremely talented lineman to protect your crappy quarterback. Enjoy.

[Part one - We're all winners Here]

NFL Draft 2013: We're all winners Here - Part one

NFL Draft 2013: We're all Winners Here - Part one
by Dan Salem and Todd Salem (4-29-13)



TODD:
You were right. The second round and into the weekend of the draft was exciting... perhaps more exciting than Thursday night. There were quarterbacks taken rapid fire, running backs not named Lacy kept getting picked, teams traded up for big names, and luckily all the offensive linemen were taken in round one so there were actually some skill position players coming off the board.

In the end, I think the Giants' draft turned out very well. They addressed every need other than linebacker. I enjoyed the Nassib pick as well. And, in my opinion, there is no better selection on draft day than taking a previously highly-touted player who's stock has dropped. Damontre Moore in round three might not pan out, but he was originally predicted as an early first round pick for a reason. It was worth the risk at pick 81 for sure.

Although things are looking good, the Giants certainly did not have the best draft out of anyone. That distinction belongs to the St. Louis Rams.

Of course, you better have a top tier draft when you have two first round picks. But not messing up with those two first round picks isn't always a given. (That was not a shot at the Jets even though it seems particularly obvious that it hints at such a diss.) The Rams came into this draft needing tons of help on offense and in the defensive backfield. They addressed need number one by trading up for Tavon Austin, the best wide receiver in the draft. To build on a strength, they also selected Austin's teammate Stedman Bailey. If Sam Bradford weren't happy enough, the Rams added Barrett Jones up front and a late-round running back.

On the other side of the ball, St. Louis nabbed Alec Ogletree, the best inside linebacker in this draft. And they got him way down at pick number 30. Safety TJ McDonald was then selected in round three to help sure up the defensive backs. This team is by no means a finished product, but with help on both sides of the ball, the NFC West is not guaranteed to be just a two team race anymore.

I also liked what Green Bay and Tennessee did during the draft. Who do you think had the best draft though? We know the answer is not the Jets.


DAN:
I'm hesitant to name an out right winner when so much is unknown, but our New York teams definitely hit the mark in my opinion. I'm going to smoothly agree with your Giants and Rams analysis. Both teams filled major holes and should rebound nicely next season. But the meat of the draft and of today is my NewYork Jets. They may not have had the best draft, but they did a great job overall. Woo! More relevancy.

The Jets nailed this draft for me the fan. Not only did they fill two major defensive holes. They replaced Revis as best as anyone could hope for and added a pash rusher. Not only did they add depth to a paper thin offensive line and trade for a proven running back. Both moves are pretty sweet. The Jets stole top ten level talent in the second round by drafting Geno Smith at quarterback. I was shocked when he didn't go in the first round. I was nearly as surprised to see Geno fall to the Jets in round two as I was for Milliner to fall to them in round one. And today they cleared all the junk out of the trunk by releasing Tim Tebow. If Mark Sanchez gets released next week we'll have a clean sweep! Realistically the Jets will wait to see how David Garrard's health pans out, but this team is making moves.

I couldn't have asked for more. The Jets cleaned out the proverbial house of as much of last year's team as possible. Thank you!

The rest of the league mostly improved on paper, but not to poke a sleeping giant, did the Patriots forget to show up? This could prove to be the AFC East's biggest win of the weekend.

[Part two - Losers, there are Always Losers]

What ha... happened? - April edition Part Two

What ha... happened? - April edition Part Two
by Dan Salem and Todd Salem (4-12-13)

[Part One - The Eli Manning Face]



We scour the internet for crazy sports photo and someone must try to explain it. Seesaw Sports asks what ha... happened? Monday: opening statements. Friday: rebuttal.

Real photos. Real results. But what in the heck happened?



TODD:
I present to you the following:

Photo: The original Manning face, courtesy of Peyton.

Title: "The Original"

Description: While you claim Eli is famous for his reactionary shots, the original Manning Face belongs to older brother Peyton. Peyton Manning created, honed and perfected the Manning Face during his time in Indy. He has since brought it with him to Denver.

The question is, of course, which Manning makes better faces?

Is it Peyton's resigned, thin-lipped mouth with scrunched forehead that emotes just the correct amount of disappointment and disdain in his team's failings, or is it Eli's normal, dead-eyed, blank stare (the crazy eyes shot not withstanding) that gives off the impression that he has no idea why things didn't go his way or the impression that he is not fully aware of how things even transpired?

What ha... happened and which Manning face wins?


DAN:
In the spirit of our photo series I'll first tell you what happened, then lay out the facts on which Manning makes the better face. As to 'The Original' and Peyton Manning's face, this particular iteration happened after a fruitless effort to converse with his former head coach Jim Caldwell. Its well known that Jim Caldwell may not in fact be alive. At the very least, speaking to him is like talking to a wax statue with the occasional mumble or grunt. Peyton Manning's stone face, meet Jim Caldwell's waxy goodness. Much like rubber and glue, nothing Manning could every say got through to his coach. A classic grimace resulted. That's what happened.

Now the real debate, Eli Manning's doe eyed deer face versus Peyton Manning's stink eyed face.

Although the original from Peyton came first and is unique in its own right, Eli wins HANDS DOWN. His ability to look lost amid both blunder and success is unparalleled in the sports world today. He looked the same in Monday's photo, getting sacked, as he did when he threw the infamous 'Helmet Catch' pass to David Tyree in the Superbowl that led to a touchdown and the defeat of the New England Patriots. That look, the Eli Manning face, is where fear meets shock and confusion in the perfect storm of eye's wide open. And yes Patriots fans, I just utilized a small scalpel to scrape apart the scar over the wound left by that defeat and a lost perfect season. Cue the evil laughter. Muahaha.

Eli Manning wins. Again.

[Part One - The Eli Manning Face]

NFL Free Agency Fallout: How Insane was that? - Part One

NFL Free Agency Fallout: How Insane was that? - Part One

by Dan Salem and Todd Salem (3-25-13)

DAN:

March Madness is in full swing, but the real drama in March is NFL Free Agency! Its time to talk free agency fallout, and this year its like the sky is literally falling on some teams, while others are floating up to heaven.

Free Agency began on March 12th. I want your instant reaction to the insanity that took place over those first 48 hours. The initial bombing raid, if you will, that has left the NFL in complete shock and recovery mode two weeks later.

TODD:

That was quite a flurry, wasn't it? The NFL is definitely better than any of the other sports at drumming up interest around free agency movement since so many quality players get cut every year. This is directly related to the fact that contracts are not all guaranteed and teams often bring back their own players on new deals, but still. We never get to see anything like this in basketball or baseball where teams cannot afford to release players underperforming their deals.

A funny thing that developed though is who made news in those first few days. A lot of good players switched teams, but not all of them were headline worthy according to...somebody. The big names were all at skill positions, offensive players. I don't know why I expected anything less, but I had to actually do some hunting to learn about the other quality players moving around.

Who we did hear about were the wide receivers and the running backs, and there was a lot of movement in those two departments. It is certainly fun to learn who moved where, for fantasy purposes mostly. But I am not sure these moves have as much football weight as some of the other positions. Other than perhaps Reggie Bush, Wes Welker or the top guys at each spot, the rest are just names we know but impacts we will probably forget.

Instead, the real meat of free agency happens between the tackles on offense and on the other side of the ball. Jake Long signed with the Rams, providing aid to a seriously depleted unit; Will Beaty and Phil Loadholt returned to their respective teams, while Jermon Bushrod and Gosder Cherilus did not. On the defensive side, Adrian Wilson went to the Patriots; Dominique Rodgers-Cromartie went to the Broncos; Connor Barwin moved to the Eagles while Cullen Jenkins moved to the Giants. These moves (along with many others) should have headlined free agency ahead of Shonn Greene or Rashard Mendenhall news.

There are a ton of players who still remain unsigned, but taking a quick scope of things overall, it seems like the Patriots made out pretty well...like always. They lost Danny Woodhead but upgraded that spot to Leon Washington. They lost Wes Welker but stood firm by adding Danny Amendola. Patrick Chung left the defensive backfield but the Pats filled that hole with the addition of Wilson while also bringing back Kyle Arrington and Aqib Talib.

On the other hand, the Baltimore Ravens managed to lose player after player from their Super Bowl squad, and haven't really done much to replace them. Ray Lewis and Anquan Boldin are gone. It appears as though Ed Reed is too. Cary Williams, Paul Kruger, Dannell Ellerbe and Ma'ake Kemoeatu all left as unrestricted free agents while Bernard Pollard and Dennis Pitta may too move on through different means.

But, on the plus side, they made Joe Flacco the highest paid player in the history of the sport. So there's always that ($$$).

DAN:

The NFL is definitely great television, no matter if games are being played or not. I must insert a caveat however, I'm SICK and TIRED of hearing EVERY SINGLE ESPN correspondent's opinion on the EXACT same story. I mean seriously, what the hell? You mean to tell me that the guys from Numbers Never Lie, Sportscenter, First Take, Mike and Mike and NFL Live all want to discuss how Revis Island may get traded? Or how Wes Welker is now a Bronco? Come on ESPN, if I learned anything out of this flurry of NFL news its that you're their bitch. I love the updates, but find something else to talk about. I can't listen to the same story and opinion all day long. I'm going to turn the channel.

But enough about ESPN. The NFL is what's really in upheaval, or at least that's what they want you to think. Besides the unparalleled gutting of the Baltimore Ravens, not much has changed. I'll address the Ravens first. They were old. They muscled out a Super Bowl championship and now they're getting younger. Flacco aside, he's now doomed to go down as the worst signing in Raven's history, they aren't paying for old guys and will slide gracefully into a rebuilding year.

Otherwise, like you noted, many MANY players have switched teams. The Broncos are better with Welker, the Seahawks are better with Percy Harvin and the 49ers are still very very good. The Patriots have also remained atop the AFC. What's changed? The teams that were good last year have made moves to keep them that way. Teams that were bad, like the Jets, are actually making the smart decision to get younger and dump as many of the players that made up their crappy team as possible.

I will call out the Dolphins as the lone exception here. Much like the Redskins in years past, they have managed to vastly improve their team on paper. I call BS. This is still a slightly above average team fighting for its life in a division with Bill Belichick and Tom Brady. They'll be lucky to win nine games next year.

[Final Fallout - NFL Free Agency Part Two]

NFL Parity, where Anyone can Win - Part Two

NFL Parity, where Anyone can Win - Part Two
by Dan Salem and Todd Salem (12-7-12)
[Part One]

TODD: 
Clearly, saying Andy Reid is saying enough. But outside of the fat and the mustachio and the Venn diagram where they cross, nothing else in the NFL is known and fans need things to bank on, to keep them sane. Upsets are grand and having the playoff picture muddled for two and a half months is fine, but where is the constant?

Remember that guy from Lost, the one traveling through time... Desmond. Remember how Desmond needed a constant to keep from going crazy (or dying or something)? Well, without a point of reference there's no basis of understanding to the NFL. If any team can go from last to first and vice versa, how are fans supposed to relate and find meaning in the games? Football then goes from a sport with rooting interest to a spectacle with random outcomes.

There is no dumber bet in sports than the preseason predictions of NFL division winners. I need my constant.

DAN:
I'm glad we both agree on Andy Reid.  And your Lost analogy is a good one, but I do think there are plenty of constants in the NFL for fans to use to stay sane. Yes, teams can go from worst to first, but this is a good thing. However, there are about five teams in the last five to seven years that have always been good, and about five teams that have always been awful.

This constant is more than enough to keep fans sane. This season has thrown a wrench into the whole machine, I can't argue with that, as the usually solid teams have been losing games that one would think they never would. I attribute this to defense and the changing game (a la rules and coaching) more than the unpredictability of how good a team is. The Patriots, Ravens, Steelers, Packers, and Giants have all been good to great for the last five seasons easily. I think by the end of this year they will all have winning records to stand on. And as for the bad teams, well the Browns and Chiefs may stand alone this season, but the Lions, Rams, and Cardinals all are pretty awful on average too.

I find the NFL has lots of constants and I'm thrilled that one team’s victory over another isn't one of them.  Unless we are talking about the Giants over the Patriots of course.

TODD:
It seems like revisionist history to label teams as consistently good for a five year span. Both the Giants and Packers sneaked into the playoffs the years they won the Superbowl. And they each had seasons recently where they missed the playoffs, the Packers finishing 6-10 as recently as 2008. The AFC squads you mentioned have been more dependable (although I'm not sure who is truly elite this season). Really the turnover in the NFL is the only reliable thing.

Each year divisions flip, playoff teams lose double digit games and bottom dwellers jump up to respectability.  If the NFL has one constant it is in its ability to be consistently not constant and I find that rather disconcerting.  A stronger word might be depressing or eye gouging.

DAN:
I can't disagree with that, although I want to.  But I'm definitely not depressed.  The NFL is entertainment, a crazy flip flop league that makes so much money from gambling that its in everyone but the fan's best interest to be crazy and flip floppy.  Embrace the chaos.  Anything completely unpredictable will always be entertaining.

[Click here for Part One]

Link to header Image