Scotty Doesn't Know

As many of you know, and really considering how much I've talked about it as all of you should know, I will be going to Europe tomorrow for my first hop across the pond in five years and my first wild youthful-indiscretion filled backpacking trip, well, ever. As a result, I've basically been playing the movie Eurotrip in my head for the last several days and quoting some of my favorite lines in it like, "You brought a guide book to a party?" and "I saw a gay porno once. I didn't know it until halfway in. The girls never came. The girls never came!" And to think, the only reason I saw the movie when it came out was because it was the only one playing after Starsky and Hutch that we could sneak into.

Oh college.

In any event, this wild whirlwind trip will take me through Rotterdam, Antwerp, the Hague, Amsterdam, Berlin, Prague, Vienna, Munich, Aachen and Brussels in roughly two and a half weeks, so I'm going to be out of the loop a little bit and sparsely updating here if at all.

But that's not the real concern that is weighing on all of our minds. The real concern, obviously, is "How will Dave's wild Eurotrip impact his favorite baseball team, the New York Mets?" It's a question we've asked ourselves for ages, with great minds often going mad in the process. In fact, it was St. Thomas Aquinas who at one point said, "A Met has free choice to the extent that he is rational," which one has to assume that the Amazins and myself, really, operate independently of one another.

However, a look at some of the evidence argues otherwise. See in my last few entries I noted this impending concern by expressing relief that I won't be in the U.S. to see what I can only assume is likely to be the Mets' inevitable downfall and tumble in the wild card standings. After all, I had mostly mentally checked out before this season began expecting an 82-win season at best (which is about what they're on pace for at the moment), but that doesn't take into account how well they've played over the last month and since the first 18 games in particular, which would indicate an increasing rate of productivity and wins. Essentially, their likely win output over a broader sample size is hampered by their horrendous start, but if we take a derivative of the data set, we'll see that the rate in change in the function when X=July 9 is obviously much higher than it was on April 16.



Did I lose you? I got all calculus-y on you for a second. It's been a few years. Essentially, what I'm saying is the increased rate of change means that if they continue to improve exponentially, they're likely to win more than 82 games. Unless this is a parabolic function. I think. I was a history major, what do you want from me.

I'm getting off track.

Here is the key information you need to know. I was wondering if I stood a chance to miss out on the Mets' season free fall by being in Europe but if the past is any indication that chance seems... not so likely. This will be the third time I have traveled to mainland Europe. My first trip was in April of 2000 when I went to France with Madame Said's French class in 9th grade. The second was in April and May of 2006 when as a junior in college I went to an academic conference in Metz, France and Saarbrucken, Germany to discuss Germany's national identity at the 1936 Berlin Olympics as compared to the 1972 Munich Olympics.

If you're a Mets fan the years 2000 and 2006 should clearly stick out to you as the last two times the Mets went to the NLCS, in the case of 2000 they reached the World Series and in 2006 they should have (and I'm convinced would have won the whole thing if they did). Of course those teams were far better than the one playing now, but here's the real question. How did the Mets do exactly while I was in Europe?

I don't remember the exact dates of my trip in 2000, but I do know that every morning I went to a news stand to get a copy of the International Herald Tribune so I could see the score of the Mets game and every day they seemed to win. In fact, over the nine days I was in Europe, the Mets won nine games.

In 2006, my trip took me to Europe from April 25 to May 4, and if we glance at the Mets' schedule that season we find that they went 7-2 over that span.

So essentially, in the 18 days I've spent on mainland Europe, the New York Mets are a combined 16-2, good for a sparkling .888 winning percentage. I'm about to double those 18 days and I guess we'll see if the Mets can double that impressive mark. I'm assuming they probably won't but all in all a man can dream -- particularly since going 13-2 in the 15 games they'll play while I'm out of the country will seriously thrust them into the middle of the Wild Card, and possibly divisional, race. And that would be something wholly unexpected when the season began.

If it happens, I think it's pretty clear they'll have me to thank.

Enjoy the rest of your July everyone. I'll try my best to check in while I'm prancing around Europe. If I don't, you can be sure I'll write a follow-up to see if my trip actually helped the Mets chase a pennant.

Now That's An Entrance. And An Exit.

Let's assume for a second that last night, Friday, May 13th, you were actually watching the Mets-Astros game. No, I know, no sane, rational person would be doing that on a nice Friday night in the spring time, but that's not the point of the exercise. Let's assume that you saw fit to watch to baseball teams that are probably going nowhere duke it out for three hours.

Although, as I point that the Mets are going nowhere I should also note that aside from an interminable 2-12 stretch earlier this season the Amazins are actually 16-8. And their four-run eighth inning last night did show off some rather exciting moxie.

But I digress. These are not good baseball teams. And given that we know that already in May, it's pretty clear that this game is not worth watching when you could do more productive things with your Friday night like see friends or stare at a wall.

However, one of the great things about baseball is that every game gives you the opportunity to see something you've never seen before, and while a late comeback to win a baseball game, or even a Mets victory, are things I've seen before, I had never seen something like this.

Yeah, that's a crazy fan running onto the field, something that has happened numerous times before, and while this particular incident won't inspire a silly debate about the necessity of tasers, or point out just how dumb Philadephia sports fans are, it's easily the greatest attempt to evade the authorities that I've ever seen from a stands jumper. That's what the Astros get for having that stupid hill in center field. And the best thing about it, beyond the acrobatics shown by the fan in question, is that, seemingly, no one really got hurt. It was just a fun-loving fan livening up the crowd.



Steve McQueen would be proud.

Now that said I don't want to imply that I'm suddenly encouraging fans to jump the stands and run onto the field. Far from it. More often than not these events wind up being potentially or actually dangerous to at least one if not both people involved.

Obviously we don't want that.

But if you, as a fan, absolutely have to be a reckless ass and run out on the field, when you do it, at least do it in a way that is most importantly not dangerous and almost as importantly, awesome. And this was pretty damn awesome. Even some of the players enjoyed it.

Of course, the one big problem with this is that all 15 Major League games today might get stopped by some schmuck hoping to duplicate the impressive feat. I'm guessing that it'll happen at at least one game somewhere this week. While that will be infinitely irritating, I'm at least going to revel and cherish this moment, almost as much as the Mets actually playing sort of ok lately or Geelong winning its big showdown with Collingwood Friday.

After all, how could I not enjoy the second funniest news item to come out this week?

The One Time In My Life That I'll Actually Think The NBA Does It Right

I'll be honest in that I think Draft Lotteries are kind of silly. Yes, I understand the point is to increase incentive late in the season so bad teams don't just throw in the towel knowing that a high draft pick is their reward. But the incentive to play well is also provided to most of these players by the prospect of, you know, not having jobs. So whatever impact a potential high draft pick has, I'd have to think, is minimal. After all, with the very real chance of getting cut or traded, most players, I'd assume are less preoccupied with the well being of their franchise in the longterm than of their own well being in the short term.

As a result, potentially robbing the worst team in the League of a rightly deserved chance at the top overall pick in the draft, and the best chance of improving itself, seems somewhat unfair.

But God Bless the NHL, because the fine folks in professional hockey have a solution to this stickler of an issue. That solution is that there are several rules beyond simply picking a ping pong ball out of a jar, with the most prominent one being that the most you can move up in a Draft Lottery, even if you win, is four spots, meaning that no one beyond the five worst teams in the League can grab the top spot and the draft is weighted in such a fashion that the worst team must be extremely unlucky not to get the top selection as their chances are roughly 48.2% with everyone else's chances far lower.

This is far more reasonable than the no-holds-barred weighted lottery the NBA uses in which any team can grab the top spot with a little bit of luck. That system has only given the top spot to the worst team in the League three times in 21 years, and in some occasions, wholly undeserving teams defy the odds and grab the top slot, such as Chicago in 2008, which won despite having only a 1.7% chance of winning and being better than eight other teams, or in 1993 when the Magic actually had a .500 record and won the draft lottery despite having just a single ping pong ball in the running. For the record, those picks turned out to be likely 2011 League MVP Derrick Rose and, in the event of Orlando, Chris Webber, who was immediately flipped to Golden State for Penny Hardaway and three first-round picks which would eventually turn into Todd Fuller, Vince Carter and Mike Miller. Sure, more ridiculous things in this world have happened, and yes, the pick that wound up being Carter was shipped to Toronto before he was drafted, but either way you slice it, that's an almost overwhelming amount of talent for a team that just missed out on a playoff berth.

So yes. In my estimation, the NHL's system is far better for purposes of maintaining fairness. Or at least, that's how I felt before the Devils were involved.
Now, I know what you're thinking. The Knicks have been involved in the lottery for nine of the past ten years, so you've had a reason to care, Dave. True. But the Knicks and Isiah Thomas were preoccupied with drafting Renaldo Balkman instead of Rajon Rondo, and about 18 of their draft picks went to Chicago in a trade for some overweight lug with a heart condition, so, really, you know those picks were pretty worthless anyway.

The Devils are different. They've got a decent scouting department and their history of drafting has worked out pretty well. When given a top five pick, New Jersey's churned out Kirk Muller, Brendan Shanahan, Bill Guerin and Scott Niedermayer among others. That's two likely hall-of-famers, one of whom was arguably the best puck-moving defenseman of his era and two players who had long careers as productive forwards. Those four players have 10 Stanley Cups among them. That's pretty solid, and it doesn't even account for other homegrown Devils like John MacLean, Martin Brodeur or Ken Daneyko.

So the Devils, who had the eighth-worst record in the League this year have typically been a trustworthy franchise when it comes to the draft, and the prospect of them moving up in the Draft lottery was awfully enticing, particularly since the Devils haven't had a decent first-round pick in almost 20 years as a result of being one of the more successful franchises around. But those rules inhibiting teams from moving up so far didn't really impact me. After all, the Devils' chances of winning the draft lottery and moving up were only 3.6%, so why bother getting your knickers in a twist?

Oh, they won. How about that?



So yeah, for the first and probably only time in my life, I wish the NHL had taken a cue from the NBA, but to be honest, that is for completely selfish reasons. The rational side of me knows the NHL's Draft Lottery system is far better for creating interest, but still protecting fairness.

Still, one can't help but dream of the prospect of the Devils grabbing the No. 1 overall pick through a tremendous amount of luck, but alas the strict rules of fairness and propriety prevent that, even if the idea of "winning" the Draft Lottery but not getting the top pick are a little confusing. Either way, as a Devils fan, it's hard to be upset with this result after New Jersey's first season since 1996 not being in the playoffs.

Oh, and speaking of the playoffs, those start tonight, in case you were wondering. I won't go into too much detail for all your sakes, but let's just say I'm taking Vancouver to knock off Boston in the Stanley Cup Final. Which almost certainly means it'll be the Predators over the Sabres.

When Winning Is Losing. And Vice Versa.

I do not like Duke. I believe that's what makes me most like the rest of America. In fact, I'm fairly certain the only non-Duke graduate who actively roots for the school is my cousin Geoff, who told me this morning, "Never bet against the Blue Devils." Of course, that seems particularly odd to say today considering Duke was rather surprisingly bounced from the NCAA Tournament last night by Arizona in the Sweet Sixteen. I won't get into the peculiarities like how it could be fair for a No. 1 seed to host a school from Tuscon in Anaheim, or how Duke could have seemingly forgotten to play basketball in the second half when the Wildcats went on a very impressive run.

But I will say this. I was not betting against the Blue Devils. In fact, I was betting on them. And after letting me down the one time I was actually rooting for Duke, it could be a while before I do it again.

As I alluded to in my last entry, I was in a survival pool for this year's Dance in which I fared far better than my actual bracket -- which I haven't even looked at in days -- did. In fact, after a wild Sunday night, I was one of just five people remaining, and I had assumed that of the games Thursday night, Duke was the one sure bet to win. And so, with the chance of winning a $700 prize on the line, I put my hopes with the Blue Devils and watched.

And then that happened.

So yeah, I was out of the running for $700, and even the considerable silver lining of "But Duke lost, which makes everyone happy" wasn't going to comfort me.

Then, there was a window opened about 15 minutes later in New Orleans. I have a soft spot in my heart for the Wisconsin Badgers since several of my friends, my sister and my grandmother are all alums, and if Northwestern is out of the running, which, uh, they were, I'll usually throw my lot with Bucky. But when I noticed that all the remaining participants in the pool had Wisconsin advancing, and that a win by Butler would knock everyone out, I changed my tune.

See, if anyone advanced to Friday I was done completely, but if the five remaining participants all lost in one night, we would have a five-way tie and a split pot. I wouldn't quite be getting $700, but a take of $148 wasn't too shabby, and my decision was made despite the overwhelming temptation to cheer for a team that would offer a basketball scholarship to Christopher "Kid" Reid of the early 90's hip-hop duo Kid N' Play.

What moxie.

Fortunately for me, Butler answered the call in a win that really was never in doubt until Wisconsin made a late rally, which led me to two conclusions, a) While it wouldn't be quite as satisfying as a $700 take from this year's pool, I still managed to win an extremely satisfying $148 -- my best take from a March Madness pool ever, and b) Butler probably shouldn't really be an eight seed.

Granted, the Bulldogs did go a relatively paltry 23-9 this regular season with five losses in the Horizon League, but their comfort and determination on the big stage has become clearly evident in big tournament wins over No. 1 Pittsburgh and now No. 4 Wisconsin. On almost gets the sense that even without Gordon Hayward, Brad Stevens and his boys were simply biding their time until it was March.

At this point, seedings aside, I can't see how one wouldn't give them a fighting chance at knocking off Florida Saturday and landing in their second consecutive Final Four. And once they're there, playing like they are, all things are certain. All I know is that from now on, when I watch, I won't be doing so with so much anxiety.

After all, despite losing, I made my money. It's almost like playing for the Mets.

Season Tickets: The Dilemma Of The Die-Hard Fan

When I was 20 years old I decided for fun to put my name on the Giants' season ticket waiting list. It was partially serious and partially a lark, but given that my number on the list generally hovered between 90,000 and 86,000, which would require an entire stadium's worth of fans to die off or give up their tickets for my turn to present itself, I assumed I wouldn't be getting the opportunity to buy season tickets for 20 years or so. This in turn prompted my father to ask if he could go to some games with me because, in his words, "I plan on still being pretty lucid."

He'll be 74, so I imagine he will, in fact, be lucid, but something funny happened on the way to my 40th birthday.

When the Giants moved into their new stadium this past season, not only was there an increased capacity, but a few bizarre quirks changed the game. For one, the Giants and Jets, not anticipating such extensive financial fallout, raised prices just a bit too high for the vast majority of their demand. As well, the scourge of NFL fans known as personal seat licenses wreaked havoc on the Big Blue fan base. By charging PSLs that were as high as $20,000 in some places, the average fan and many families that had been season ticket holders for years were priced out of being able to see their team every Sunday.

Now, while I can understand their frustration, the theory behind PSLs doesn't really bother me because it shifts the cost of a stadium to the people who will actually attend games in it rather than the average taxpayer who has no interest in going to a game. But more importantly, the PSLs and the other factors I mentioned previously opened a gaping hole in the waiting list, and by the start of the 2010 NFL season, I got a phone call from the Giants ticket office that was about 15 years earlier than I expected.

My number was up. I had the chance to buy season tickets.

Here's where it gets interesting, however. For one, I enjoy going to one or two games a year, but eight? Or realistically since you're required to buy preseason games at full price, 10? For another, the only remaining seats in the standing were far out of my price range. They were club seats that would cost $400 each per game and each seat had a PSL that was valued at -- wait for it -- $7,500.

So if I wanted to buy Giants season tickets when my number came up, the total first year cost (note: PSLs can have their costs spread out with longterm payment plans) would have been $23,000. That was not a price I had interest in paying.

So imagine my surprise when the Giants came calling again this morning to offer me season tickets, which I was quick to dismiss until they told me the choices had gotten cheaper. Of course, the word "cheap" is relative, but in this case, compared to the first chance I had it certainly was. The cheapest seats available ran at $120 -- I paid $150 to attend the Giants' first ever game at the New Meadowlands Stadium -- and PSLs would be $4,000 per seat, nearly half the cost of the previous tickets.

Herein lies the dilemma. Being able to call myself a Giants season ticket holder is something I have wanted for years, but is the cost enough to justify it? And moreover, if I'm not going to attend the games, the obvious choice, to not purchase tickets at all or to sell them at a markup and hope to recoup the cost of the PSLs through those means an enormous amount of work, or a leap of faith at any rate.

Throw this in with the fact that PSLs are available for far cheaper on the Giants' PSL exchange site -- albeit for much worse seats -- and things get more complicated.

Clearly, there is much to consider for anyone who has the chance to buy some, and I'm personally grappling with the realities right now. In the end, with logic dictating, I will probably not buy tickets at all, but that doesn't mean I won't be thinking long and hard about it over the next few days, and I will probably be placing a call to the Giants' ticket office in the morning to get a sense of what my options would be.

If I get too crazy, it may not be the last call I make to them.

The Carnegie Deli Sparks The Great Sandwich Debate

Those of you who have seen me either at meal time or in my pre-16-year-old days know that I enjoy eating quite a bit, and as a result, from time to time I have to face startling questions of a gustatory nature. Periodically, I even take up those issues right here on this blog, which is to say I've done it once. But make no mistake, the debate of cake vs. pie remains volatile. In any event, I bring this up to you because the Knicks' acquisition of Carmelo Anthony this week has prompted the Carnegie Deli to make a bold foray into the sports arena that has torn the very fabric of New York's sandwich community asunder.

And that, my friends, is the 'Carmelo Anthony'.

Yes, the Carnegie Deli knew there was a power vacuum in the sports-themed sandwich hierarchy in this city and the biggest trade to clog up our twitter feeds maybe ever provided just the opportunity for Carnegie Deli owner Sandy Levine to steal the throne. Indeed with this collection of corned beef, pastrami, salami, bacon, lettuce, tomato and Russian dressing on rye bread he makes a compelling argument as for why this sandwich should rule the roost, particularly since each ingredient was chosen for a specific reason, like a master tactician composing his cabinet of advisers. For instance Levine noted that the sandwich includes bacon because, "we want Carmelo to bring home the bacon to New York." In a quirky touch the inclusion of Russian dressing was an obvious jab at bold, and possibly crazy Nets owner Mikhail Prokhorov, though Prokhorov may have made a fairly bold statement this morning anyway.

Now, this is hardly the first time sandwiches have made their way into the sports world. Peppi's Old Tyme Sandwich Shop made waves several years ago in Pittsburgh when they introduced the Roethlis-burger, a hearty collection of sausage and hamburger topped with fried egg and American cheese. It sells for an appropriate seven dollars.

But while I keep up on my dietary news from other cities around the country -- some particularly worrisome news has sprouted up in Chicago recently -- New York is where I spend most of my time and therefore it is the place I'm primarily concerned about. This is why the moves by the Carnegie Deli strikes such a chord, but there is some awkward tomfoolery afoot that could only be caught by the true aficionados.

The Carnegie Deli has done this before. Enter the Mo-Licious.

Yes, after the Mets acquired rotund first baseman Mo Vaughn in 2002, the Carnegie Deli staked its claim to sports-themed sandwich superiority with a devastating combination of corned beef, pastrami, turkey and cheese piled so high on rye bread that it literally was as tall as Vaughn's head. The always weight-conscious slugger even noted at the sandwich's introduction, "To endorse this sandwich is not really the message I want to send to the club."

Don't worry, Mo. You backed up your dedication to fitness with that .784 OPS you compiled in your two seasons with the Amazins.

It is clear that this is not the first time the Carnegie Deli has attempted to use a major trade to boost sales with a remarkable new sandwich, and while I can't speak for which sandwich is the better of the two -- I never got the opportunity to try the first and have yet to taste the second -- I do hope for the sake of all of us that these sandwiches don't provide an ominous portent for Melo's tenure in New York. Granted, by the time Vaughn arrived he was a shell of himself suffering from numerous physical ailments. Anthony is 26 and has little in the way of injury concern.

But either way, the Carnegie Deli has given us some deep introspective thinking to do. What impact will these sandwiches have on the New York spectrum of edibility? The results are yet to be seen. However, if you can still breath after eating one of these, you'll have to decide which side you're on.

As Chris Berman will attest, it's serious business.

All I know is I'm looking to try it. Anyone interested in tagging along, please step to the front of the line.

Anyone Notice That The Devils Are Kind Of Really Good Right Now?

I am faced with a massive quandary as a Devils fan right now. In what has been a trying season -- New Jersey has spent most of the season with the League's worst record -- my team is suddenly hot as a pistol and making a wild, bizarre run at the final playoff spot in the East. That playoff spot is still a far, far ways off, but it's an awful lot closer than it used to be. Last night, New Jersey trailed in the third period in Toronto before Ilya Kovalchuk pushed himself end-to-end and fired a game-winner past James Reimer in the waning seconds of overtime.

And just like that the deficit was down to 13.

Now that may not seem like the most exciting revelation. After all, New Jersey is still third to last in the Eastern conference. But that 13-point deficit was 24 points not so long ago, and with 27 games remaining there is ample time for that deficit to start dropping bit by bit. In fact, that win over Toronto Thursday night has pushed New Jersey's mark to 11-1-2 in its last 14 games, which easily makes them the hottest team in the League at the moment. Thursday night was the Devils' second consecutive overtime victory after defeating the Hurricanes in OT Tuesday at The Rock -- a game I was actually in attendance for -- and it now may have the New Jersey building the adequate momentum to make a serious run at the final postseason seed.

The win in Toronto also put coach Jacques Lemaire in the 600-win club, a feat that was written up by some anonymous lackey at NHL.com.

Lemaire's accomplishments are a pivotal part of the story, of course. The man who led the Devils to their first Stanley Cup Championship in 1995, has showed a remarkable ability to get the most out of his teams -- as he did with the Devils a season ago in what was expected to be a one-season return to the Garden State before moving on into retirement. What he has done so far this season, however, may eclipse anything else he's done. New Jersey was 9-22-2 when Lemaire was brought in to replace company man John MacLean on Dec. 23. At that point the idea of a playoff run was well off the team's radar -- and in likelihood it still is. Instead for the Lemaire, the challenge was to remind the players that not only were they professionals, but they were expected to be Stanley Cup contenders when the season began.

Rediscovering the Devils' confidence under Lemaire has been a rough process -- New Jersey went 1-7-0 in its first eight games following the coaching change, culminating in a home-and-home sweep at the hands of the hated Flyers. Since then, there has been a change, however. And the results have been staggering.



New Jersey was 27 points behind eighth-place Montreal on Jan. 9. In 14 games, the deficit has been halved.

With 27 games remaining there is certainly time for the Devils to get closer and closer, and while they would likely have to continue playing at the same remarkable pace of the past month, fans like myself have slowly started to believe that anything is possible. So why not?

Well, probability is one reason to believe why not. Cool Standings as of today still lists the Devils' chances of making the postseason this year at less than .1%, and I generally find a reliance on numbers and statistics to be the likely outcome in the long run. But without knowing the actual math they use, I'm not sure they can account for intangibles like momentum, but I can also attest, mathematically speaking, to a belief in regression to the mean and the law of larger numbers. All season long the Devils have been playing beneath their expectations and their talent level, but the larger the sample size -- in this case, 82 games -- the more likely the Devils' final record should approach their expected performance this season.

Now the Devils were expected to compete for a division title against the likes of defending-Eastern Conference Champion Philadelphia and 2009 Stanley Cup Champion Pittsburgh. While the chances of winding up in that race are just about nil, sneaking into the postseason with the final seed, if this team continues to return to its expected level performance over the long haul, certainly doesn't seem all that outlandish to me.

So that aforementioned quandary is this. Do I lament the likely loss of the Devils first potential top-five draft pick in decades, which could be used to patch a number of holes? Or do I get behind the improbable comeback?

Is it likely? Probably not. In fact, earlier this week I decided that I would wait until New Jersey had closed the gap to 10 points, and that it would have to happen by the 61st game of the season, before I fully invested myself emotionally in the prospect of the Devils making a stunning and unlikely playoff run. But with five games and only three points to go before that threshold, I'm starting to believe. It's only been a month of this season that the team has actually shown any signs of life, but now they're as lively as can be. And if they knock off the hottest team in the West in Newark tonight, (though I should note tonight's Chicago-Dallas game is also pretty intriguing as this preview attests) things could really get interesting.

And then I'd really start to believe that it's possible. In the end, short of a Championship, believing, in any season, is all you can really hope for.

The Journey Continues In 2011 With Team No. 38: The Philadelphia 76ers

Yes, 2011 is almost six whole weeks in and here I am with not one new team knocked off the list. This isn't the worst thing if I'm planning on keeping pace with the needed rate. I decided a year ago that if I wanted to see all 122 teams by the time I was 55, this would require seeing roughly six new ones per year -- or one every two months. Well fortunately, I'm not too far gone for that pace to continue so far, and this calendar year could actually have me seeing as many as 11 teams or as few as, well, one.

But I will have one!

And I know that because Team No. 38 will be crossed off the list this Friday when myself and at least five other hearty souls attend the Knicks-76ers game at the Wells Fargo Center in Philadelphia. While I've already attended this building once for a Flyers game a year ago, I'm extremely excited for a few reasons. Firstly) It's one step closer to my goal. Obviously. Secondly) While I was never not a Knicks fan over the last decade, this season has easily made me a reinvigorated one. Thirdly) Rather than traveling to meet one or two people, as is the usual situation, a whole group of my friends and I will be driving down to Philadelphia for the game. Fourthly) I'll be wearing the first Knicks jersey I've ever owned. Fifthly) There may be a potential tour of Lincoln Financial Field in the works provided I don't let my anti-Philadelphianism get the best of me.

And I am anti-Philadelphia. I have made this clear. But sometimes you have to go to the belly of the beast to get what you want, and I have a goal to accomplish. Sometimes we do unsavory things, even if there are cheesesteaks involved.

Whether or not that cheesesteak from Pat's is involved is yet to be seen, but either way, it should be a fun evening for all involved with one more step being taken towards those white pearly gates of the North American sports scene.

As it stands, that will be my first trip of the year, but hopefully the first of many. I am expecting to see the Washington Capitals when they host the Blackhawks in March and I recently booked a flight to Detroit in April where I will see the Pistons and Red Wings. Originally I considered flying out in January to see the Red Wings play the Devils, but a) the Devils are in the midst of a painful season and b) it's January in Detroit. I've had more than my fair share of snow this year. I'm not interested in anymore. Unless all of the snow results more star wars statues like the one to the left.

I'd sign up for that in a second.

Before I wrap up, I should note that this will be my first trip since December's adventure to Nassau Coliseum to see the Islanders face-off with the Penguins, and in a bit of full-circle quirkiness, the Islanders played the Penguins again tonight. This time the Penguins won fairly easily, but the score was almost secondary because this game featured something I would have killed to see in person. That's right. This game featured the two greatest words in hockey.

"Goalie Fight."



That's the Islanders' Rick DiPietro being dropped like a rag doll by Pittsburgh's Brent Johnson, and while Johnson may be a backup goaltender, he appears to be a first-rate pugilist with a cross like that. If that isn't DiPietro's career as an Islander in a nutshell, well, I don't know what is. Thanks for letting us watch, Rick.

On that note, I'm done with this ramble. See you in Philly.

Who Wants To Buy Part Of A Minor League Baseball Team?

Yeah, that's right. I don't know if any of you heard, part of the delightful fallout from that whole "Madoff thing" is that there's a baseball club that's looking for some minority investors. Some of you may never have actually heard of this "baseball team" because their performance over the past few years has called into question whether or not they are a "real" baseball team, but sure enough they've been playing 162 games a year -- no more than 162, let's be clear -- right here in the Big Apple.

Come on. You've heard of them.

Yes, that's right people. Mets chairman Fred Wilpon and his son Jeff announced this week both with a released statement, a press conference, and a personal e-mail to their fans which made me feel oh so special, that they have decided to explore finding new investors interested in a minority stake in the New York Mets. A real live baseball team!

Now, if you've been following the 'Ropolitans like I have for more than a decade, this announcement seems like a particularly odd one for the Wilpons to make for a few reasons. For one, they've done an extremely large amount of work over recent years to consolidate and improve the financial potency of the franchise. The introduction of SNY in 2006 has gone quite a distance to bring more money into the team's coffers and give them a financial base, ideally, more in line with those crosstown rivals in the Bronx. In addition to that, the recent construction of the Wilpon moneyfactory, also known as Citi Field, was further intended to strengthen the team's position. Lastly, and perhaps most notably, Fred Wilpon has tried awfully hard to make sure this team would belong to him and only him.

Obviously, given the track record of one Fred Wilpon, it seems patently bizarre that he would want to unload a chunk of his baby just as he's finally prepared the setup to make the team flourish financially even if it doesn't do the same on the field. So what gives?

Oh right. That.

It seems someone has decided that considering lots of people have lost money due to the pyramid scheme of Bernie Madoff, and because the Wilpons, who had hundreds of millions of dollars tied up in those investments, um, didn't, they must be the perfect people to sue to get that money back. What with Bernie being in jail and all -- without his Mets jacket -- it makes sense. I won't claim to understand how all the legal liabilities work in this thing since I'm, you know, not a lawyer, and I'm sure there's a legitimate reason why the Wilpons might possibly be somehow liable in this whole horror story, but it all seems kind of silly to me. Regardless however, absolutely none of that matters. The only thing of note is this:

There's a part of the Mets for sale!

Why is this so exciting? Well, some people might claim it is, in fact, not exciting at all, and while Rob Parker may have a point here, he's also an unnecessary provocateur and an asshole, so I'm going to ignore him for the moment. No, for me this is more exciting because I've just realized this is as good a prospect as any to pull some money together and own a baseball team. Indeed, that prospect was the very first idea I had when I first saw the story.

Shockingly none of my other potential investors seem interested in joining in despite my assurances that the Mets could not possibly be worth more than $10,000 or so given their on-field performance the last few years, but the bigger obstacle than this might be competition. And apparently that competition is coming. My guess is these other potential owners are going to jack the price out of my personal range, but let me state this right here for all who are interested.

I AM WILLING TO LISTEN TO ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED IN FORMING A BID TO BUY A MINORITY STAKE IN THE NEW YORK METS.

Is that clear? I want to buy the Mets, I want to pool money to get the job done and I will actively seek partners. Not only will owning a piece of a Major League Baseball team be a great source of pride, but we'll get to see any Mets game we want for free (probably) and it'll totally help us get chicks. Or men if that's your fancy. Plus, I'm totally a really serious big time Mets fan. Just look at that picture of what I wore to my brother's wedding this summer to the right. I'm totally right for it. If I somehow won't be the right person for the job, the list of potential minority owners is certainly interesting.

My personal preference is for the minority bid to go to a group that is headed by Martin Luther King III, which also involves former Met Ed Kranepool and the son of Mets great Donn Clendenon. Failing that, however, the likely bid being brought forward by Martin Silver, the owner of Georgi Vodka, will at least make those long painful days at the park go faster.

In fact, the more I think about it, the more appropriate it seems to align the classy Mets organization with the class of a brand of vodka that is sold in plastic bottles.

If I'm unable to get my hands on any piece of the Mets, I will simply have to settle for watching the Wilpons' iron grip on the franchise slowly recede, which, given the team's prospects since they gained full control of the franchise, probably isn't the worst thing as I've noted before. Now to be fair, I suspect that regardless of ownership, the administration of Sandy Alderson will bring a much more professional auspice to the franchise and that success will follow, much as it did with Frank Cashen in the early 1980s, but giving the Wilpons less power couldn't hurt. And in the end, the prospect of the team forcibly getting better ownership is really enough for me.

Considering that this weekend already saw Southampton blow a second-half lead in the FA Cup against Manchester United and that Northwestern blew a tantalizingly close chance at knocking off No. 1 Ohio State, well, the promise that the Mets are on the way to better times would help salve those wounds. The fact that I also booked a flight to beautiful Detroit for a Pistons and Red Wings game this April also perks me up a little bit (more on that in a few weeks), but when I realize that the Pro Bowl is tonight, well, that just makes matters worse.

This is why, for the good of the Mets, and maybe my sanity, this chunk of the Mets being for sale is coming just at the right time. If it can't be me, maybe it can be someone else who actually knows how to run a baseball team.

But remember, I'm not giving up on my bid for a piece of the pie. Someone out there will want to take a bite, too. Who's with me?

NFL Picks Week Fifteen: In Which I Care About The Knicks Again

Holy shit.

After a decade of ambivalence towards a team that made mediocrity seem good, I actually care about the Knicks again. For those of you who haven't been paying attention, New York has won 13 of 14 games with their last being an impressive victory over the Nuggets Sunday afternoon. While another winning streak was halted last night in a heartbreaking last second loss to the Boston Celtics, there are a few things to notice here about this team. First of all, Amar'e Stoudemire is a monster in the front court, plain and simple. I was among the chorus of individuals who viewed him as a nice signing for the 'Bockers this offseason, but not one that could singlehandedly turn a franchise's fortunes around. His role was best as a second fiddle to someone like LeBron James, who shockingly landed elsewhere.

I was wrong.

Not only can Amar'e be "the guy", but he's thriving of late. Of course, second of all, for me to say he is the sole reason for the Knicks' recent good fortune would be shortsighted. Danilo Gallinari, Raymond Felton and Wilson Chandler have all played parts in the resurgence. Third of all, this game, even as a loss, proves the Knicks can play with the big boys. This wasn't a fluke, this wasn't random and it could be a harbinger of the team's return to relevance in a League in which New York has been an utter non-factor for the past decade. I have at times lamented both the Knicks' absurd mediocrity and my own youthful foolishness in choosing to root for them, but perhaps, at long last, that may no longer be the case.

Wednesday night's wild shootout with Boston was the second time the Garden rocked this week, and MSG hasn't had that kind of basketball excitement in it since the Knicks lost to San Antonio in the 1999 NBA Finals, or maybe even since the days of Patrick Ewing and John Starks. Now things are different and even the opposition, in this case Paul Pierce, recognizes it. After the game last night Pierce noted, "The Knicks have arrived."

So, in the midst of all this excitement, I bring to the table a curiousity wholly related to the sudden rise of Mike D'Antoni's boys.

This feels kind of funny.

No, not ha-ha funny. This feels weird, odd, highly unusual. In a good way, of course, but watching the Knicks and actually having a reason to feel hopeful is something I haven't experienced in my entire adult life. So dramatic is the shift that the Knicks missed out on my 2000s jersey-buying spree and as a result I don't even own one piece of Knicks merchandise. It may be time for this to change. A bobblehead or two, or at least a jersey, might be in order in time for my tentative plans to see the Knicks in Philadelphia in February, but before I get to that point, I'm going to need to recognize and reconcile these odd feelings I have about actually wanting to watch the Knicks play basketball again.

The only thing I can really relate this to, and this may sound odd, is the kind of awakening that comes when you hit puberty. I remember, pretty exactly, when the first moment was that I saw a woman in a bikini and was actually intrigued rather than being ambivalent or grossed out. As an 11-year-old whose mother had, for whatever reason, opted not to tell Sports Illustrated to keep the Swimsuit Issue to itself when I moved over from SI for Kids, I saw the 1997 SI Swimsuit Issue on my coffee table one February, the first thing even remotely close to pornography that I had ever owned. The thoughts that run through your mind when you aren't quite sure if you're supposed to like what you're seeing -- even though you know you do -- are a cautious curiosity of the as yet unknown. And while this may seem like an utterly ridiculous parallel to draw -- that's because it is -- that's what I feel like I'm experiencing with the Knicks. The unknown. I've never known what it's like to be a post-pubescent adult who actually has a reason to be optimistic or care about the Knicks. I don't know what this is or how to manage it, just that I may not have a choice in doing so. And given that situation, I'm going to do whatever it is I can to make the best of it. Or at least enjoy it.

Now that said, I understand that it's foolish to assume the Knickerbockers are suddenly championship contenders. But they are, at long last on the road back.

They matter. And last night is as a piece of evidence as you can hope for that they do.

And with all that said, I sometimes feel as though I've written a solid blog post that stands on its own -- and this is one of them. But those damn Thursday night NFL games mean I'm going to have to hackily tack my NFL picks onto this ode to 'Bocker basketball. So here we go.

Last week: 9-7-0
Season: 104-95-10

SAN DIEGO (-9) over San Francisco
NY GIANTS (-3) over Philadelphia
Cleveland (+1) over CINCINNATI
DALLAS (-6) over Washington
Houston (+2) over TENNESSEE
Jacksonville (+5) over INDIANAPOLIS
Kansas City (even) over ST. LOUIS
MIAMI (-6) over Buffalo
TAMPA BAY (-6) over Detroit
Arizona (+1) over CAROLINA
New Orleans (+1) over BALTIMORE
SEATTLE (+7) over Atlanta
OAKLAND (-7) over Denver
NY Jets (+6) over PITTSBURGH
NEW ENGLAND (even) over Green Bay
Chicago (even) over MINNESOTA

And there you have it. I'm off to watch some Knicks basketball. For the first time in a long time.

Good Thing I Didn't Buy That Ticket To Minnesota

At the beginning of every NFL season I take a look at the schedule to see what trips I might be interested in taking around the country. Because the Giants only visit teams in the AFC once every eight years, those, clearly, are at a premium. Look no further than last season's trip to Kansas City, this season's trip to Indianapolis or next year's planned jaunt to New England for evidence of that. NFC trips I still like to make, but there is far less urgency, and it might be for that reason that I opted not to go to Minnesota this season for the Giants' Week 14 showdown with the Vikings.

Given that I have a good friend at the University of Minnesota and I have a soft spot for the upper midwest, it was certainly a consideration, but boy am I lucky I opted to pass on that trip this year. For those of you who haven't seen, a blizzard hammered Minneapolis this weekend, which despite the Giants' best efforts to beat the snow to the punch -- they left 3.5 hours earlier than scheduled -- the weather was so bad New York was actually diverted to Kansas City for the night. There were serious concerns Saturday night over the fairness of holding a noon CT game Sunday afternoon that would require the Giants to leave Kansas City at 7 a.m. for a game five hours later, and while the Vikings pushed for the game to stay on schedule -- with the inherent competitive advantage, who could blame them -- the logistical nightmare of mobilizing an entire football team at such short notice finally pushed the NFL to postpone the game until tonight, still to be played at the Metrodome.

At this point, with Monday and Tuesday off from work at ticket prices dropping precipitously in Minneapolis due to the scheduling change, I once again began looking up plane flights, and very nearly purchased one that, because it was cheap, was nonrefundable.

Good thing I chose to wait a few hours. While most of us were sleeping, God intervened.



Yeah, that's right. The inflatable roof of the Metrodome collapsed and tore open in the middle of the night, pouring tons of snow on the field and, clearly, making the building unusable for the forseeable future.

With the structural challenge of holding a game in Minnesota the NFL was left to scramble for an alternative venue, with places such as the University of Minnesota's TCF Bank Stadium and New Orleans' Superdome discussed, before the NFL finally decided to truck their entire operation to Detroit and hold the game at Ford Field. Ironically, it will be the first Monday Night Football game at the home of the Detroit Lions, who will not be playing.

While this is, undoubtedly a bizarre situation, it is not without some precedent, particularly for the New York Giants. Famously, a Giants-Saints game was relocated to Giants Stadium in 2005 after Hurricane Katrina had decimated the Superdome and the Saints were left entirely in limbo for the course of a season. Less well-remembered is a Chargers-Dolphins game that was shifted to Tempe, Ariz., due to wild fires in the San Diego area in 2003.

This may be one of the more bizarre and unexpected game relocations in recent memory, however, and with a crowd of nebulous rooting interests awaiting -- tickets were free to the Detroit public and disappeared in 90 minutes -- no one is quite sure what to expect. The Vikings, however, may be disappointed with a lack of anticipated fan support. The only Viking who may be happy is Brett Favre, who just may get to keep his vaunted streak alive with the delay.

And the rest of the world very much is disappointed with that possibility.

In other news, before I sign off, something bizarre happened in hockey that I'm sure none of you are aware of -- nor can you find in today's excellent Blackhawks-Avalanche preview -- that is pretty wild. In a showdown between Minnesota and Anaheim, the Wild's Mikko Koivu stole the Ducks' Bobby Ryan's stick right out of his hands after losing his own. And the result? Bobby Ryan picked up Koivu's stick and scored a goal. Of course. The craziest part? Koivu's stick curved in the wrong direction for the right-handed Ryan. Check it out for yourself.



You may have to watch it a few times to grasp the whole exchange, but boy is it bizarre. If nothing else, I'm convinced that karma, at least in hockey, exists.

As for whether or not it exists in football, well, we might find out tonight in Detroit, though really, aside from how bizarre the situation is, I'm not really sure of anything with this game -- least of all whom might be favored by that karma. All I can do is watch.

NFL Picks Week Thirteen: In Which We Learn Oil Money Can Buy ANYTHING

One of the great things about this summer's 2010 FIFA World Cup was not just the inspiring and then heartbreaking performance of the U.S. team, but that it was an event uniting a continent and a nation with a history of racial and social tensions so profound, that putting on such a successful show for the world was an accomplishment in and of itself. While South Africa is now experiencing some issues filling its World Cup venues, the tournament itself was a tremendous and uplifting event for any fan of the beautiful game.

So with the decisions to be made for 2018 and 2022 today, it's good to see that FIFA had absolutely no interest whatsoever in maintaining that inspiring storyline. Now, don't get me wrong. I'm not going to sit here and tell you that my personal preferences for each event -- that would be England in 2018 and the United States in 2022 -- would have had the same uplifting social impact that the Cup in South Africa did, but at least England is a nation with a soccer history as rich as any could be, as well as one that would be 52 years removed from its last turn as host by the time 2018 rolled around. In the case of the U.S., people can bash soccer fandom in this country all they want, but the blunt fact remains that the United States is still a vibrant, growing melting pot of numerous international cultures that all put a dramatic importance on the game. Include the fact that by 2022, the increasing Hispanic population will no doubt be a potent force in U.S. society, and that for the 2010 World Cup more tickets were bought by Americans than any other nationality, well, the U.S. seems like a pretty reasonable place to bring the World Cup back to.

Instead, however, the 2018 World Cup and the 2022 World Cup will be played in Russia and Qatar, respectively, proving once and for all that you just can't beat oil money. Now, I don't want to come off as bitter here, nor do I want to appear ignorant of the nation Qatar, which, yes, I did know existed, if for no other reason than because Northwestern has a campus there. But, regardless, there's no way around the fact that these are two countries feeding off petroleum, a source of energy the world is supposed to be weening itself off of, and the fact that either nation would otherwise be an unlikely candidate makes it seem almost obvious that some foul play might have been involved. To any impartial observer -- though I admit, I'm not one -- there are a number of concerns and questions to be asked. After all, Qatar is a country of less people than nearly every U.S. state and it happens to be smaller in size than Connecticut. In fact, only Delaware and Rhode Island have it beat on the minimization scale.

While some people might be pleased with the outcome of the vote, there's no avoiding the fact that Russia already has raised suspicions with its successful bid to host the 2014 Winter Olympics in Socchi, dubbed the "Gazprom games", and Qatar's utter lack of size (can it fit 10 world class soccer arenas and still have room for parking lots?), horrific summer temperatures (its average high in July is 115 degrees fahrenheit) and, uh, debatable soccer tradition, bring about several questions as to whether the nation can successfully host the event. The country will get its first measure when it hosts the 2011 AFC Asia Cup, but that seems to surely be on a different level.

Now, let's not get the wrong idea. Qatar is no primitive middle eastern backwater. It is extremely modern, with connections to several U.S. universities and progressive technology. But perhaps the biggest reason why it won is because it is, uh, rich. Really rich. Of course, most of this money comes from, yeah, oil. And as the rest of the country tries desperately to ween itself from what has been a useful, but destructive, source of energy, this raises enormous concerns when one considers the games are 12 years away and 70% of Qatar's government revenues come from petroleum. What happens if the money runs out? And also, how hot can the fans take? Qatar has announced that its stadiums will be outfitted with carbon-neutral solar systems that will lower the temperature inside the buildings by as much as 20 degrees celsius to maintain the comfort of players and fans. But just how viable is that?

Also, on a personal level, it's slightly unnerving that Qatar has announced it is "generous" enough to allow Israel to participate should it qualify, despite not formally recognizing the Israeli government. I suppose there is also the point that Israel could gain a measure of headway towards making peace with Arab nations by appearing in the games, but color me skeptical. It might have been more reasonable to host the games elsewhere.

I'm sure both hosts will pull off the job with little worry, but a host in 2018 such as England, Spain/Portugal or Belgium/Netherlands, or of course the U.S. in 2022, just seems like a more reasonable, and wholesome bet. But at this point, those two candidates are here to stay. We may as well accept it, even if we're so steamed about it that we can't even bring up Northwestern's totally amazing win over Georgia Tech Tuesday night.

And now to the other football. You know, our football. A sport that is not at all corrupt on any level.

I'm not sure how many people out there have gotten the chance to check out what may be the awesomest thing I've ever seen on the internet, but it's this doohickey. ESPN, ever the progressive digital purveyor, has created a simulator that shows you how the NFL playoff picture changes as you select each game's winner over the next five weeks. And it is just about as cool as it sounds. Now, I won't lie and tell you my picks may not have been slightly biased, nor are they particularly consistent since I came with a wholly different slate of teams the first time I did this last night, but regardless, it's a pretty sweet little gizmo. If you like football and have five minutes too much time on your hands, well, it's a sweet way to kill them.

And now that I'm done with all of my screeds, it's time for some picks.

Last week: 9-7-0
Season: 88-79-9

Houston (+9) over PHILADELPHIA
NY GIANTS (-7) over Washington
New Orleans (-7) over CINCINNATI
Chicago (-4) over DETROIT
GREEN BAY (-10) over San Francisco
Jacksonville (even) over TENNESSEE
KANSAS CITY (-9) over Denver
Cleveland (+5) over MIAMI
MINNESOTA (-6) over Buffalo
SAN DIEGO (-13) over Oakland
INDIANAPOLIS (-6) over Dallas
St. Louis (-4) over ARIZONA
SEATTLE (-6) over Carolina
TAMPA BAY (+3) over Atlanta
BALTIMORE (-3) over Pittsburgh
NY Jets (+4) over NEW ENGLAND

That's all for today. I'm about as tired from writing that as you are from reading it. Happy football everyone.

NFL Picks Week Eleven: In Which I Go Back to Chicago

As I mentioned a few weeks ago, this weekend I will be making my first visit to Chicago in more than three years, which, to put it mildly, is far too long. New York is my home and the greatest city in the world, but my four years in Evanston, Illinois and in close proximity of the City of Broad Shoulders will always give Chicago a fond place in my heart. This week it will likely cost me the chance to see most of this weekend's NFL action -- though don't worry, my flight lands in time for me to comfortable catch kickoff of Giants-Eagles --but it's a worthwhile endeavor.

And why, you ask?

Well, as you can see the marquee on Chicago's Wrigley Field was painstakingly painted Northwestern Purple for this Saturday's Northwestern-Illinois game, which will be the first college football game played in the friendly confines in more than 70 years. Squeezing a regulation football field inside has proved something of a challenge, and in some cases, like the distance from the end of the east end zone to the right field bleachers, it is almost laughable as to how tight the game will be played. Since the last college and professional football games were played in Wrigley club seats have been added to the field level which have squeezed the area a bit. The orientation Northwestern seems to be going with is a bit odd considering that the field ran north to south when the Bears played in Wrigley, rather than west to east. Looking at artists' renditions, however, it seems clear officials anticipated this considering they didn't bother drawing uprights in the east end zone in their early depictions.

Clearly it was much easier to build a hockey rink there, even if they had to come up with ice.

Either way, the field is finally starting to come into shape and I can't help but be outlandishly excited about it. Or at least buy all the crap merchandise that's being churned out for the occasion. Personally, I opted not for the ephemeral, but for the eminently reusable Northwestern football jersey. I chose Dan Persa even though I know he will be out with a torn achilles after spearheading last week's stunning upset of No. 13 Iowa, but he'll be back in full force next season to lead NU to its inevitable 2011 BCS National Championship. It's totally gonna happen. Just wait for it.

All around the excitement seems to be building. Northwestern head coach Pat Fitzgerald, a uniquely social-media savvy leader, has been tweeting pictures of the field, Northwestern's practices there, and the cramped locker room as the game reaches kickoff. A plan to have the players ride the Chicago El from Evanston to the Addison stop on the Red Line has been nixed unfortunately, but the blow of losing that novelty has been softened by the presence of a much bigger one. ESPN Game Day has been rumored to be coming to Northwestern several times in the past few years, but each time was just that. A rumor.

This weekend, ESPN just couldn't help itself with the prospect of having that Wrigley Field marquee in the background of its shots for four hours, however, so at long last Game Day is here. I won't be joining the legions of students that are busing down from campus at 4 a.m., but I will be making my way there sometime in the morning to scope out the scene and pretend I'm in college again. After that, Northwestern has set up several areas to tailgate with fellow alumni or buy food around Wrigley, and I will be checking out the whole place.

Hopefully I will be sober and energized enough by the time kickoff comes around at 2:30 p.m. CT that I'm not completely out of it, but something tells me the opportunity to be a part of a once in a lifetime event like this will make it easy to keep myself alert. I've been tremendously excited about this game for months since it became official. And as the clock finally starts to wind down before my 9 a.m. flight to O'Hare tomorrow, I can hardly contain the excitement of a purple-drenched football weekend in Chicago with a host of college friends who live there or are flocking in to town. It's almost enough to forget that there are professional games the next day.

Almost.

And with that, here are this week's almost certain to be incorrect picks. On a side note, if some of you are wondering why I haven't mentioned the Giants' loss to Dallas last week, it's because I've convinced myself it didn't happen. On with the show.

Last week: 5-9-0
Season: 68-68-8

Chicago (+1) over MIAMI
NY Giants (+2.5) over PHILADELPHIA
Buffalo (+6) over CINCINNATI
DALLAS (-7) over Detroit
TENNESSEE (-7) over Washington
KANSAS CITY (-8) over Arizona
Green Bay (-3) over MINNESOTA
NY JETS (-7) over Houston
PITTSBURGH (-8) over Oakland
Baltimore (-10) over CAROLINA
JACKSONVILLE (-2) over Cleveland
ST. LOUIS (+3) over Atlanta
NEW ORLEANS (-12) over Seattle
Tampa Bay (+3) over SAN FRANCISCO
NEW ENGLAND (-3) over Indianapolis
SAN DIEGO (-10) over Denver

There you have it. Enjoy the games. I'm off to college.