I've put this off long enough, it's time to make my Super Bowl predictions. I've looked at all the "experts" picks, all the stats I can find, and talked to my friends. I'm picking the San Francisco 49ers to beat the Baltimore Ravens on Sunday.
This boiled down to one thing really. The Ravens have trouble stopping the run. They haven't played a team in the playoffs that has an above average ground game. San Francisco clearly has an above average rushing attack. Everyone keeps talking about how Kaepernick can't throw from the pocket, so all the Ravens have to do is contain him. Did anyone watch the 49ers beat the Falcons? There was only one play called that was a designed QB run. Kaepernick threw for 233 yards. That's not a ton, but the thing about the SF offense is they are versatile. In that game against Atlanta, Kap threw for a TD, Gore rushed for two, and LaMichael James rushed for two. Oh, and that TD that Kap threw was to Vernon Davis. So now in addition to having Crabtree and Moss, Kap has finally found Davis. This isn't an offense that can be stopped by playing one scheme. You have to be ready for anything and everything.
Now I'm not saying the Ravens defense isn't good. Lewis, Suggs, and Reed are all great. But I don't think they're fast enough to keep up with the SF offense. They stack the box to stop Gore, Kap either uses his legs or hits one of his 3 more than capable receivers. I just don't think the Ravens have seen anything like the 49ers offense. In fact, the two games they played against "running" quarterbacks, I prefer the term mobile but whatever, they lost. In week 2 they lost to the Eagles, giving up 371 yards in the air to Michael Vick. They contained him on the ground, but didn't do squat down the field. Yes that game was ages ago, but it's important. Also, they lost to the Redskins. This was in week 14, so much more recent. RGIII hit them for 242 yards in the air and 34 yards on the ground. Clearly they were more prepared for a mobile quarterback. Problem is, they gave up 129 yards on the ground to Alfred Morris, a rookie. That 'Skins offense is fairly similar to San Fran's. Baltimore had trouble against Washington, I have no reason to believe they won't have trouble against San Francisco.
If I was a gambling man, which I am 100%, my money is/will be on San Francisco. I like San Fran at -3.5 and I definitely like the over at 47.5, in fact I'd probably take the over if it was 51 or lower. My final score prediction is 34-24 and my MVP pick is of course Kaepernick.
Follow me on Twitter- @TwittinSports
Thursday, January 31, 2013
Wednesday, January 9, 2013
Hall of Fame Voters Toss A Shutout
The results everyone expected were confirmed Wednesday, no one has been elected to the baseball Hall of Fame this year. This was one of, if not the most controversial ballots in MLB history. Names like Clemens and Bonds appeared for the first time. Also making their inaugural appearance were Mike Piazza and Craig Biggio. But after the votes were counted, no one received enough votes to be enshrined in Cooperstown this year.
Like I said, coming into today it seemed as though this was going to be the outcome. Personally, I don't like it. I don't see how Biggio, who led all vote-getters with 68.2%, and Piazza, 57.8%, didn't get elected. Yes, I know they will eventually get in, but it only gets muddier from here. Guys like Frank Thomas, Tom Glavine, and Greg Maddux will be eligible next year. They're sure to get take some votes away from Biggio and Piazza. That's not to mention guys like Jack Morris, who will be nearing the end of their time on the ballot.
The surprising result, to me at least, was the lack of a disparity between the amount of votes Clemens and Bonds got. Clemens got 37.6% and Bonds got 36.2% of votes. Even if you add their percentages together, they're still not eligible. For me, Bonds should never be enshrined, but I'd vote for Clemens. Clemens never tested positive, and has never been convicted in anything related to performance enhancing drugs. The same can't be said for Bonds. I know that may be a thin line to some, but it's enough for me. That also means McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro, and when the time comes A-Rod would not get my vote. I simply don't think people who cheat should be honored with baseball's most prestigious individual honor.
I realize there are cheaters already in Cooperstown. The use of uppers, aka greenies, was rampant throughout baseball for decades. Sadly, there is nothing that can be done about that now. But electing more cheaters just because there are already people who cheated doesn't make it right. Like the old cliche says, two wrongs don't make a right. This isn't to suggest guys like Bonds weren't great. He was great. Perhaps one of the greatest hitters I'll ever see play the game. He put the bat on the ball amazingly well, and no amount of performance-enhancing drugs helped that. But I firmly believe his power numbers would've been nowhere near as high without PEDs, and that says to me he wouldn't have won as many awards. The sad part in my mind is that Bonds would've been a Hall of Famer without using PEDs. There's no debate that he had an incredible amount of talent.
It is completely understandable why people think Bonds should be in the Hall of Fame. I'm not saying my way of thinking is right, it's just my opinion. I can argue for Bonds just as easily as I can argue against him. I do have one radical idea that will never happen. Cooperstown creates a wing that is just for cheaters. Members of the 1919 White Sox would be in there. Pete Rose would finally have a home. All of the steroid guys could go in. The selection process would be the same, but don't give them the induction ceremony. No speeches, no celebrations, just a plaque/bust/exhibit commemorating their achievements in the game and explaining why they are in this special wing of the Hall. Never going to happen, but I sure wouldn't be against something like this.
My ballot, if I had one, would've been-Biggio, Bagwell, Piazza, Clemens, Murphy, Morris, Schilling, and Edgar Martinez. If you filled out a ballot, who would you have voted for?
Follow me on Twitter- @TwittinSports Like the blog on Facebook- A Bloop And A Blast
Like I said, coming into today it seemed as though this was going to be the outcome. Personally, I don't like it. I don't see how Biggio, who led all vote-getters with 68.2%, and Piazza, 57.8%, didn't get elected. Yes, I know they will eventually get in, but it only gets muddier from here. Guys like Frank Thomas, Tom Glavine, and Greg Maddux will be eligible next year. They're sure to get take some votes away from Biggio and Piazza. That's not to mention guys like Jack Morris, who will be nearing the end of their time on the ballot.
The surprising result, to me at least, was the lack of a disparity between the amount of votes Clemens and Bonds got. Clemens got 37.6% and Bonds got 36.2% of votes. Even if you add their percentages together, they're still not eligible. For me, Bonds should never be enshrined, but I'd vote for Clemens. Clemens never tested positive, and has never been convicted in anything related to performance enhancing drugs. The same can't be said for Bonds. I know that may be a thin line to some, but it's enough for me. That also means McGwire, Sosa, Palmeiro, and when the time comes A-Rod would not get my vote. I simply don't think people who cheat should be honored with baseball's most prestigious individual honor.
I realize there are cheaters already in Cooperstown. The use of uppers, aka greenies, was rampant throughout baseball for decades. Sadly, there is nothing that can be done about that now. But electing more cheaters just because there are already people who cheated doesn't make it right. Like the old cliche says, two wrongs don't make a right. This isn't to suggest guys like Bonds weren't great. He was great. Perhaps one of the greatest hitters I'll ever see play the game. He put the bat on the ball amazingly well, and no amount of performance-enhancing drugs helped that. But I firmly believe his power numbers would've been nowhere near as high without PEDs, and that says to me he wouldn't have won as many awards. The sad part in my mind is that Bonds would've been a Hall of Famer without using PEDs. There's no debate that he had an incredible amount of talent.
It is completely understandable why people think Bonds should be in the Hall of Fame. I'm not saying my way of thinking is right, it's just my opinion. I can argue for Bonds just as easily as I can argue against him. I do have one radical idea that will never happen. Cooperstown creates a wing that is just for cheaters. Members of the 1919 White Sox would be in there. Pete Rose would finally have a home. All of the steroid guys could go in. The selection process would be the same, but don't give them the induction ceremony. No speeches, no celebrations, just a plaque/bust/exhibit commemorating their achievements in the game and explaining why they are in this special wing of the Hall. Never going to happen, but I sure wouldn't be against something like this.
My ballot, if I had one, would've been-Biggio, Bagwell, Piazza, Clemens, Murphy, Morris, Schilling, and Edgar Martinez. If you filled out a ballot, who would you have voted for?
Follow me on Twitter- @TwittinSports Like the blog on Facebook- A Bloop And A Blast
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)