HarleyQuinn

Poor Wilson having to substitute the real thing for Cutthroat Bitch Tuesday's preview looked great.

Stinging loss but the Giants made the plays. The Eli scramble and Tyree catch, even as a Pats fan, was just a thing of beauty.

Gotta give credit to both defenses at this point... was not expecting this kind of score this late into the game.

Also remember to PM the person after you once you pick to keep things "moving" although there's usually a cluster of 5-6 guys on at once who are all in a row so...

Looking back... putting the European Title on Davey Boy Smith essentially killed it right out of the gate too (and putting it on Owen wouldn't have been any better). He was 1/2 of the Tag Team champions with Owen at the time and they were constantly having matches with teams like the Legion of Doom and later being apart of the whole Austin/Michaels vs. Hart Foundation feud so there were almost no title defenses by Davey Boy. In all honesty, it probably could have been a bit more prestigious on a wrestler like Vader who could defend the title show after show while still being a decent name at the time.

I'm largely including matches that didn't have angles or just seem really purposeless. WrestleMania 10 - Earthquake vs. Adam Bomb (0:32) WrestleMania 12 - Triple H vs. Ultimate Warrior (1:36) In Your House 01 - Mabel vs. Adam Bomb (1:53) In Your House 03 - Savio Vega vs. Waylon Mercy (7:06) In Your House 05 - Ahmed Johnson vs. Buddy Landell (0:42) In Your House 10 - Jose Lothario vs. Jim Cornette (0:57) In Your House 18 - Max Mini/Nova vs. Tarantula/Mosaic (6:43) And the WWF wondered why they were so awful in 1994/1995?

There are actually quite a few "other" matches... Raw: Triple H vs. Big Show for the WWF Title in 2000. Yes, it helped start the Triple H "run" and Cactus/HHH feud starting at the Rumble but they could've built it up to the Rumble. Big Show dominating opponents like the giant he is while Triple H is also beating people left and right for his "rightful opportunity" Raw: Tag Team Titles 1997 Owen/Bulldog vs. HBK/Austin. A great, great TV match but it could've been a very dependable #2 match or Main Event on a PPV during the time too. Raw: WWF Title 1994 Bret Hart vs. 1-2-3 Kid. Could've easily been a main event for a show like King of the Ring as a 'respect' match. 1999 Raw was ripe with these... Triple H vs. Kane in a Steel Cage, Rock vs. Mankind on 02/15 in a Ladder Match, Steve Austin/Mankind vs. The Rock/Paul Wight on 03/15 in Big Show's wrestling debut. Another small feud that could've gone somewhere PPV wise but didn't IIRC... the Val Venis run where he was facing The Rock and Mankind on Smackdowns. Could've served as a 3rd match on a stacked PPV or a #2 match on a smaller IYH.

Hitting a roll with Dinosaur Jr., Oingo Boingo (Danny Elfman FTW), and My Bloody Valentine

I always thought a tag team of Credible & Albert could have been decent if Credible went to being a cocky prick style wrestler instead of the mimicry of Austin. Kind of like a 2nd (or 3rd) rate version of D'Lo/Mark Henry during the post-Nation days.

The Women's Title being on Miss Kitty and Harvey Wippleman from December 12th, 1999 through February 1st, 2000. Granted, the Women's Title/Division has never been held in high esteem (possibly exception of 2002 - 2004) but in 1999 they could've had a decent if not so good Women's Division to build the title around: Jacqueline, Ivory, The Kat (Miss Kitty), Chyna, Luna Vachon, Sable if she stayed, and Tori. Coming in shortly thereafter would be Lita who could've made a splash in that division immediately rather than wallowing around with Essa Rios, same for Trish Stratus and her 'managing' Test and Albert. It still amazes me that given the opportunity to bring in the young female fans, the WWE didn't capitalize in 1998/1999. They started out good with Jacqueline and Sable but when Sable won, they never gave any regard to really pushing her as an independent, strong Women's Champion. Instead she was in the midst of the Marc Mero feud and later stuck with Nicole Bass as a heel. The WWE could've had an early Trish Stratus from 1998 on in Sable if A] They bothered to push the Women's Title as a decent division and B] Had hired enough women workers that could wrestle rather than just look pretty and 'wrestle' on the side (Terri, Kat, etc.)

I'll support the waiver shifting to 1 day and I'm not against pre-draft trades.

Just watched almost all of the Trish Stratus/Victoria feud (1 on 1 matches only). Couldn't find their first 2 Raw matches but I kind of liken this to Triple H vs. The Rock in terms of really helping set up the importance of the Women's Title and creating an underrated little rivalry. I understand these matches won't ever hit the "Joshi" level of female wrestling but for the WWE Women's Division level, the top 3 are really worth checking out. Top 5 Victoria vs. Trish Stratus Matches (out of 14 watched matches). 11/17/2002 (Survivor Series) Hardcore: Good pace from the get go and the crowd is into it as well from the start. Victoria gets busted open hardway, adding to the match. Stronger than the Street Fight but the only downside is the instant finish, as Victoria didn't have a true finisher quite yet. Really a testament to Trish and Victoria for putting up a solid match given how few TV matches they had worked together. Some of the shots were even sicker than the street fight. Victoria busts out a few moves not before seen (or since) such as a powerbomb. 01/27/2003 (Monday Night Raw) Street Fight: Really nice heat from the Chicago crowd throughout the match. Transition from a "Puppies" chant to 'ooh'ing for the nearfalls later. Trish/Victoria bring some nasty shots with the weapons and they build off nicely from their Survivor Series match. Only downside is that the match finish again seems to suddenly end. I love the small add on by Victoria, "I hate you!" after pinning Trish. Just a great character touch. 10/10/2005 (Monday Night Raw): Really underrated little match for these two, let alone the women's division. Victoria busts out a nice snap suplex and the two have a really strong pace throughout. New moves thrown in with Victoria doing a Liontamer without the knee in the back (really worth seeing) and a power press slam on Trish. Victoria busts out a Boston Crab(!) reversal of the corner handstand as well. Only downside is that the crowd is somewhat quiet but begins to really get into it just as the match ends (typical theme). Finish comes quickly but it's notable for the debut of Mickie James after the match. 08/21/2006 (Monday Night Raw): Crowd is into it from the get go and the pace is really strong. Trish busts out a crazy top rope hurricanranna(!) which was a surprise. Decent little match between the two with the added bonus of crowd heat. This would be their final match together (in the 1 on 1 sense). 12/19/2004 (Sunday Night Heat): Crowd is into this and the match is real solid. Trish even plays to the crowd (bowing after ramming Victoria into the post). Victoria busts out a rare flying cross body and the pace is fairly fast for them. Only downside is it was rather short but otherwise, nice effort.

I always loved the Headshrinkers tag team. Here's a WWF Superstars match from 1995 with the New Headshrinkers (Fatu/Sionne) vs. Owen & Neidhart.

I'm in support of keeping the rules from last year. 7.) I would kind of like a specific date for us to have keepers in by. We have done this before I believe. We just didn’t have one last year. So let’s just put it into the rules. I think it’d make getting the league started go a little smoother. We will still do the traditional every manager confirms they want to be a part of the league to start the new thread and season off in mid January. How about something like 1 month after the MLB playoffs are over all keepers should be in. By then we should know if anyone is retiring. I also know someone will argue what if someone blows out an arm or has Tommy John in the off-season? No you won’t be stuck with the guy unless you want him. Every team should post a 1st alternate and a 2nd alternate keeper incase something happens. I like the idea of announcing the keepers 1 month after the MLB Playoffs are over. I'm not big on the alternate keepers mainly because that kind of situation could strike any team. Also, most injuries that require off-season surgery are known by the end of the season/into the playoffs. If a manager doesn't realize that Player A, who missed the final 2 weeks of the season, may need off-season surgery than that's his fault for not being aware of such an issue. 8.) Keepers. This current season we have it so every manager keeps 6 keepers. No more, no less. Last year we had 4 keepers per team. I kind of like the idea of a concrete number actually. It forces managers to make tough decisions, like a real GM. Do you cut the 37 year old guy who hit 45 HR for the 28 year old 2B who had 10 HR and 25 SB? As far as total numbers, I like the idea of 6 keepers. There are still a ton of good options in the FA pool even with teams keeping 6 players this season. It's just a matter of knowing where to look. 9.) Keepers. What do we want to do about the duration a single keeper can be on our roster? There were suggestions of making it so each manager can only have a keeper for 3 consecutive seasons. Currently we do not have any cap on the duration of a keeper can be kept. Option B: All players can only be on a roster for 3 consecutive years. After the 3rd year if a player is wished to be kept by the manager, his draft round value is re-evaluated based on what number he is ranked in the yahoo end of season standings compared to every player in the yahoo player pool. The number that the player is ranked at the end of the season would be divided by 20 to determine what round he would be worth in our 20 team draft. Example Micah Owings ends the season ranked 130. 130/20 would equal 6.5 which would put him as having a draft value of round 6 as opposed to his previous undrafted value of round 20. Any manager wanting to re-evaluate a keeper at the end of the season needs to indicate that while the yahoo player pool is still up at the end of the season. We typically start the drafting before yahoo gets the player pool and the new league page setup. Maybe after the 3rd year, if the manager wants to keep a player for the 4th year, he could based on the re-evaluated draft round but than he'd have to dump the player after the 4th year. Kind of like the NFL's "Franchise Tag" where the owner has to decide if the risk of 'paying' Player A a high draft round is worth keeping him for that 1 year. 10.) IF we choose to pick one of the options or another keeper option someone else comes up with, we need to clear up this potential loop-hole I already thought of. I really like the idea of the contract rollover. As you said, it makes it a lot more like MLB where teams "take on" the contract, etc.

Some news that may be "irrelevant" now but could prove to be big during the season... from Rotoworld. Dolphins hired Mike Maser to be their offensive line coach. Maser worked under Tom Coughlin with Miami's new head coach Tony Sparano for a season in Jacksonville. He was fired along with the rest of Coughlin's staff despite helping install a successful running game, and spent the next four years in Carolina. He was fired after the Panthers' 8-8 season in 2006, and was out of football last year. NFL Network's Adam Schefter reports the Cowboys are expected to hire Hudson Houck to coach their offensive line. Scott Linehan interviewed Falcons offensive coordinator Hue Jackson for the same position with the Rams. Jackson, who coached wide receivers for the Bengals from 2004-2006, was most recently offensive coordinator for Steve Spurrier in Washington in 2003.

What would be your HOF criteria for the big 4 sports (NHL, NBA, MLB, NFL)? Would you center it around championships, statistics, or a combination of both? Does a player passing the "eye test" get more benefit over a player who puts up great stats but doesn't "look" like he's a great player (i.e. Vinny Testaverde)?

They also play in a bit of a weaker division, meaning that a 9-7 or 10-6 season could get them into the playoffs depending on how Seattle and St. Louis do. Juh? Seattle and St. Louis? I fixed it in a later post. I'm still used to the old style East, Central, West format.

Since I mostly clomp around the Sports folder, Weird Al Keiper gets my vote.

True on being "on the bubble" in the NFC but than again, if you win 10-11 games you should be able to get into the playoffs fairly easily compared to the AFC where you may be on the bubble with such a record depending on the division you play in. In 2006 the NFC saw 3 division leaders finish at 10-6, 10-6, and 9-7. In 2005, the division leaders went 11-5, 11-5, 11-5, and 13-3. The AFC saw their division leaders go: 12-4, 13-3, 12-4, and 14-2. In 2005, the leaders went 10-6, 11-5, 14-2, and 13-3. In both years, the AFC also saw more teams win at least 10 games. In 2005, 3 divisions had 2 teams win 10 games and Miami went 9-7. 2006 saw more parity but there were still 5 teams in the AFC vs. the NFC's 3 that won 10 games or more.

Is it really? Interestingly... I know that there's a disparity between AFC and NFC but here's something to chew on. The AFC had 7 teams win at least 10 games on the season. 8 teams went at least .500 and 3 other teams went 7-9. The NFC had 4 teams win at least 10 games on the season. 9 teams went at least .500 and 4 other teams went 7-9. It seems to me that the AFC tends to have more "top end" teams in terms of records while the NFC seems more muddied and a record of 10-6 or 9-7 could be huge there in comparison to the AFC. 4 of the playoffs teams in the NFC made it with a record of 10-6 or 9-7. As for the Falcons and Ravens... In the NFC South the records were: 9-7, 7-9, 7-9 (Carolina without Delhomme), and 4-12. In the AFC North the records were: 10-6, 10-6, 7-9, and 5-11. As a head coach, I'd be happier competing with New Orleans, Carolina, and Tampa Bay... teams that could be up or down in comparison to Pittsburgh, Cleveland who seem to be turning the corner, and Cincinnati who always have the potential to go 8-8 or 9-7 any given season. Both divisions are tough but the NFC South seems to have the "easier" avenue in terms of possibly making the playoffs.

Honestly... I like the Falcons a bit more. If they have a strong draft and can fill some holes with free agents that fit the team/roles they are acquired for, the Falcons could do well next year (8-8 possibly). They also play in a bit of a weaker division, meaning that a 9-7 or 10-6 season could get them into the playoffs depending on how Seattle and St. Louis do. They have a decent backup QB in Chris Redman and can get a solid 1-2 year starter in FA while the rookie QB sits and learns. They have Warrick Dunn who's still decent as a mentor with Jerious Norwood on the verge of breaking out. They have solid role players at WR in place: Michael Jenkins is a solid #2 (he caught 62% of the passes thrown his way) with Roddy White's emergence as a #1 but they still need a good slot WR, which they can get in FA. At TE, they have Crumpler who's been consistently solid. Laurent Robinson needs to improve (49% catch rate) if he wants to stick with the team as a #4/#5 WR. Offensive line wise, they need improvement in the running game but weren't horrible as a unit last year in pass protection. Redman and Leftwich were sacked 9 and 6 times respectively in 7 and 4 games, a little more than 1 a game. Their LB are solid but they need a lot of help at CB and depth in the secondary as well as help with the defensive line. John Abraham gave them 10 sacks and DeAngelo Hall had 5 INT but they didn't have much else otherwise.

http://www.buffalonews.com/sports/billsnfl/story/253078.html Bills promoted quarterbacks coach Turk Schonert to offensive coordinator. Alex Van Pelt is taking Schonert's place as quarterbacks coach while Sean Kugler was named offensive line coach. Bills coach Dick Jauron brought Schonert to Buffalo in 2006. Schonert previously was QB coach for New Orleans (2005), the New York Giants (2003), the Carolina Panthers (2001), Buffalo (1998 to 2000) and Tampa Bay (1992 to 1995). Van Pelt played for the Bills from 1995 to 2003. He also joined the Bills’ staff when Jauron was hired in 2006. Interesting move by Buffalo. Anybody have any idea what his playcalling style will be? I.E. is he more a conservative coach or a guy who will be willing to not only favor the pass but go downfield with it?

I really love that PFR has added older season stats (i.e. prior to 1950) as well as statistics for the AAFC too.

Keepers are correct for my squad. I'm back in.

The biggest difference is the size between the two though, IMO. I'd compare McFadden more to Reggie Bush at the moment than to Peterson. Reggie also was an insane talent coming out of the draft with a solid college career though obviously not at the level of McFadden. At the Combine, AP was listed at 6'2" and 217 lbs. Here is how McFadden compares in terms of size... 6'2" and 205 lbs. (ESPN, Arkansas, Yahoo) Here are somewhat comparable players size wise in terms of what they weighed at the NFL Combine Chris Barnes: 6'1" and 209 lbs. Leonard Henry: 6'1" and 206 lbs. Lamar Gordon: 6'1" and 214 lbs. Thunder Collins: 6'2" and 190 lbs. Derek Watson: 6'1" and 212 lbs. Rod Malone: 6'1" and 216 lbs. Courtlandt Florence: 6'1" and 205 lbs. Darnell Stephens: 6'2" and 195 lbs. Ciatrick Fason: 6'1" and 207 lbs. Jerad Estus: 6'1" and 208 lbs. Demetris Summers: 6'1" and 207 lbs. The thing is that if McFadden comes in standing at 6'2" he'll have to put on a lot of weight to overcome his slight frame and adjust for the NFL. All of the solid players at 6'1" or 6'2" tended to weigh above 215 lbs or so at the Combine.