As the off-season NFL cycle comes to a close and national and local sports outlets look to bolster eyeballs on their sites, the inevitable stories appear; whether detailing Rick Pitino's abbreviated sexual exploits or reporting the unfortunate circumstances surrounding Lorenzen Wright's murder, the sports media are clinging to any story that offers the prospect of titillation, even if it means repeating stories over and over again with but mundane addendum to the stories.
It, thus, is no great surprise that, just weeks before the commencement of the NFL's 2010 pre-season, various outlets have opted to run with the story that Minnesota Vikings' quarterback Brett Favre is retiring. The source of the story of course is "sources"--the ubiquitous aid in all such downtime, need-a-story times.
Whether Favre actually retires, leaving Minnesota to make do with what almost certainly would become a half season of failure by Tavaris Jackson prior to the on-set of the Sage Rosenfels year, remains to be seen. And it is unlikely that Favre will do or say anything to dissuade the rumors currently circulating.
Unfortunately, however, in their zeal to obtain a story to fill what otherwise would be dead time, virtually every local and national sports reporter has opted to run with the story of Favre's retirement, despite the fact that not one single reporter has yet whittled down an actual source. When that is what you primarily do to obtain credibility in your profession, and when all reporters are anxious that they not miss the lead, the chasm between what once was regarded as proper journalism and what now routinely passes for sports reporting is approaching irreversible widths.
In short, if you believed, and hoped, that Favre would return for a 20th season in the NFL, there is no less reason to believe in such an eventuality today than there was yesterday. Or so sources say.
Up Next: Childress Through the Looking Glass
Tuesday, August 03, 2010
Monday, August 02, 2010
They Play Who We Thought They Played And When We Thought They Played Them
Heading into the 2010 NFL regular season, many pundits have posited that the Green Bay Packers are poised to dethrone the Minnesota Vikings as the NFC North champions. That line of thinking is the outgrowth of the perception that the Packers took giant steps last year and are on the cusp of taking yet another step forward this year.
As the old saying goes, however, it's not who you play, but when you play them. And an objective, albeit early, assessment of the 2010 schedules for the Vikings and Packers suggests that the teams that the Packers play in 2010 could create more problems for the green and gold than will the teams that the Vikings play this year.
For the Vikings, the schedule appears far more appealing than many football analysts have suggested. Though it is true that the team begins the season with numerous challenging opponents, including the New Orleans Saints, New York Jets, Dallas Cowboys, Miami Dolphins, Green Bay Packers, and New England Patriots, the team benefits from two early season bye weeks, one of them during which they play the Detroit Lions.
The difficulty for Minnesota will be weathering the first seven weeks of the season, during which the team plays four games on the road against teams against whom they likely will be slight underdogs. If the Vikings can sweep Miami, Detroit, and Dallas at home, a reasonable proposition, and win at the Jets and or at New England, that daunting seven game stretch will successfully be in the rear view mirror.
After the opening seven-game gauntlet, the Vikings face mostly average to below-average teams for the remainder of the season, barring a resurgence by the New York Giants, with their most likely challenges likely to be a home game against the Packers and at Philadelphia. The rest of the schedule includes the Lions, the Bears, twice, the Cardinals without Kurt Warner, Washington, and Buffalo. Assuming no major injuries, the return of Favre, even remotely modest play at cornerback and safety, and modest line play, the Vikings should be able to record at least at an 11-5 record, allowing for one home hiccup and assuming road victories against lesser opponents.
Unlike the Vikings, the Packers have the difficult portion of their season interspersed throughout their schedule. If Minnesota stumbles out of the gate, that could favor the Packers. But, if the Vikings simply do as suggested above, the burden will fall on the Packers to keep pace in the second half of a schedule that should be tougher for Green Bay than should be Minnesota's for the Vikings.
Though the Vikings and Packers play a similar slate of opponents, the Packers play at Chicago early in the season when the Bears will still believe they are playing for something and close against a Chicago team that likely will be looking to spoil the Packers' playoff hopes.
The Packers' season very well could hinge on games at home against Minnesota and, more importantly, on the road at Atlanta. Victories in both games, and a split with the Bears, will put the pressure on Minnesota to meet its performance expectations. A loss in either will reduce that pressure and put even more pressure on the Packers to forge through a schedule which, though containing no long stretches that ought to test the Packers' fortitude, neither permits the Packers any stretches of even relative rest.
Comparisons between the Vikings' and Packers' schedules are far more apt than is the the suggestion that the Packers have the easier of the two schedules. But the difference in when the Vikings and Packers play the meat of their schedule could bode well for the Vikings. And should the Vikings weather the early weeks of the season, the Vikings can make the case that the pressure will be on the Packers through the remainder of the season in what should be a one game divide between two of last year's NFC playoff teams.
Up Next: Present Performance Speaking Volumes About Vikings' Moves That Have Not Panned Out.
As the old saying goes, however, it's not who you play, but when you play them. And an objective, albeit early, assessment of the 2010 schedules for the Vikings and Packers suggests that the teams that the Packers play in 2010 could create more problems for the green and gold than will the teams that the Vikings play this year.
For the Vikings, the schedule appears far more appealing than many football analysts have suggested. Though it is true that the team begins the season with numerous challenging opponents, including the New Orleans Saints, New York Jets, Dallas Cowboys, Miami Dolphins, Green Bay Packers, and New England Patriots, the team benefits from two early season bye weeks, one of them during which they play the Detroit Lions.
The difficulty for Minnesota will be weathering the first seven weeks of the season, during which the team plays four games on the road against teams against whom they likely will be slight underdogs. If the Vikings can sweep Miami, Detroit, and Dallas at home, a reasonable proposition, and win at the Jets and or at New England, that daunting seven game stretch will successfully be in the rear view mirror.
After the opening seven-game gauntlet, the Vikings face mostly average to below-average teams for the remainder of the season, barring a resurgence by the New York Giants, with their most likely challenges likely to be a home game against the Packers and at Philadelphia. The rest of the schedule includes the Lions, the Bears, twice, the Cardinals without Kurt Warner, Washington, and Buffalo. Assuming no major injuries, the return of Favre, even remotely modest play at cornerback and safety, and modest line play, the Vikings should be able to record at least at an 11-5 record, allowing for one home hiccup and assuming road victories against lesser opponents.
Unlike the Vikings, the Packers have the difficult portion of their season interspersed throughout their schedule. If Minnesota stumbles out of the gate, that could favor the Packers. But, if the Vikings simply do as suggested above, the burden will fall on the Packers to keep pace in the second half of a schedule that should be tougher for Green Bay than should be Minnesota's for the Vikings.
Though the Vikings and Packers play a similar slate of opponents, the Packers play at Chicago early in the season when the Bears will still believe they are playing for something and close against a Chicago team that likely will be looking to spoil the Packers' playoff hopes.
The Packers' season very well could hinge on games at home against Minnesota and, more importantly, on the road at Atlanta. Victories in both games, and a split with the Bears, will put the pressure on Minnesota to meet its performance expectations. A loss in either will reduce that pressure and put even more pressure on the Packers to forge through a schedule which, though containing no long stretches that ought to test the Packers' fortitude, neither permits the Packers any stretches of even relative rest.
Comparisons between the Vikings' and Packers' schedules are far more apt than is the the suggestion that the Packers have the easier of the two schedules. But the difference in when the Vikings and Packers play the meat of their schedule could bode well for the Vikings. And should the Vikings weather the early weeks of the season, the Vikings can make the case that the pressure will be on the Packers through the remainder of the season in what should be a one game divide between two of last year's NFC playoff teams.
Up Next: Present Performance Speaking Volumes About Vikings' Moves That Have Not Panned Out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)