New Breakfast Served on Thursdays

"The Breakfast Table is a (mostly) morning e-mail exchange between football writers and friends Mike Salfino and Scott Pianowski. Always snappy, sometimes snippy but never high in carbs, the BT's main course is an in-depth analysis of the latest NFL developments. But side dishes of music, movies, television and the rest of the cultural zeitgeist are ordered up when the mood strikes. Salfino is stuck somewhere in the swamps of Jersey. Pianowski lives above the desiccated remains of Jimmy Hoffa in Michigan. They've been tabling together since 2002."

Visit Featured Client Sites for Live Content
Fantasy Football: SNY.tv Michigan Live ProJo.com Rocky Mountain News
Fantasy Baseball: SNY.tv Michigan Live,
New York Sports: SNY.TV

Peyton's Super Quest

From: Michael Salfino <Salfino@comcast.net>
Date: January 28, 2007 3:53:30 PM EST
To: scott pianowski <spianow@gmail.com>
Subject: Super Breakfast

People are making a case for the Bears as Super Sunday approaches. The line held steady after opening at 7 initially and now at 6.5 points in some of the sports books. Okay, they're making a case for a cover only, perhaps, but Lucky Louie once told me over the tomato plants in Paterson that you never bet on a team to cover unless you think they can win.

We have some good story lines in this one. There's AFC vs. NFC. And that really means something in light of the AFC's dominance in inter-conference games, especially since Week 7 (34-11 with a 342 more points scored, an average of 7.6 per game).

There's offense vs. defense (assuming we believe in the Bears defense, but I'm sure you'll expound on that). Who usually wins these matchups? I'd guess offense and I'd be right, as top six offenses were 11-8 this year against top six defenses. The points scored is right at the mid-point between what the offenses generally score and what the defenses allow (21 points per game for the offenses).

Interestingly, the Bears have played one top six offense all year (the Saints in the championship game). The Colts have played seven top six defenses and they're 6-1 in those games, averaging over 25 points per game. That's more ammo for the people who doubt the Bears would stop Peyton Manning even if they are as good as their overall pass defense numbers suggest.

The other big story line here is Manning. No way around that. If he wins the Super Bowl, does he become an immortal (or is he one already)? And is that the most important thing about this game in terms of historical significance, bigger than even the ultimate champion. If he lose and never gets back, does he become Marino -- a guy with a black mark tarnishing an otherwise sterling career?

We never talked about the championship games, but I'm sure they will be part of the discussion. Predictions are mandatory. Super Bowl Breakfast is served.

From: "scott pianowski" <spianow@gmail.com>
Date: January 30, 2007 5:39:13 PM EST
To: "Michael Salfino" <Salfino@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: Super Breakfast

Perhaps your first meaty reply will get me juiced for the game, but I'll need some prompting. I've spent the last week or so flicking the switch over to baseball, finally seeing The Departed (major disappointment), and interviewing for the Dallas Cowboys job. But I can't say I'm really jonsing for 41.

Maybe it's because the AFC Championship Game was so satiating. How much distance do we need before we declare it the best conference playoff game ever? All those second half lead changes, a game of major consequence, future Hall of Famers in the mix. I guess the critics can flag a few things - the fumbles, the ticky-tack fouls called - but now that we're over a week removed, it's time to rank this classic.

I put Indy-New England ahead of the Miami-San Diego game because the winner actually got to the Super Bowl (with the Chargers not wining at frigid Cincinnati, the worth of its dramatic win comes down a bit). And for Peyton Manning, could the stakes have possibly been any higher? He was only playing for his legacy, and for the right to shut up every two-bit writer who wanted to keep recycling the tired "Brady clutch, Manning choker" rhetoric. Of course the Colts have now beaten the Patriots three times in a row, but the anti-Manning crowd will have some angle, I'm sure, when the teams meet again next year.

The two-week gap between title games and Super Bowl has to help Manning, who preps like a law student readying for the bar. The Bears defense still doesn't scare me post-Tommie Harris. A lot of things went right for Chicago last week - some fumbles, poor weather, Sean Payton losing his mojo in the second half, Joe Horn not being ready - but good luck rattling Manning on a clean track this week. I'm convinced the Colts will win, and I'm considering a blowout as well (spread pick will have to wait for my second BT pass).

The critical defensive mistake the Saints made was letting Fred Thomas get anywhere near Bernard Berrian in single coverage. Why the Saints would let their shakiest cover guy mark the only deep threat in the Chicago passing game I'll never understand; perhaps it reflects that not everyone realizes how much better Berrian is than Muhsin Muhammad these days. Given the deep success Berrian and Rex Grossman have had the last two games, I wonder if Grossman will keep going to the well Sunday and take multiple shots deep. That's probably a mistake, because if there's one thing the Colts defense does well, it's take away the deep ball. Bottom line, if I'm the Colts I worry about Berrian, Cedric Benson, and Desmond Clark down the seam (where any Cover 2 is compromised); Muhammad and Thomas Jones, not so much.

What can we say about The Departed from New England (I mean the Patriots, not Colin Sullivan)? Hey, easy come, easy go. The Patriots were damn lucky to beat San Diego as we all know, and it's not bad to make it to the AFC Championship Game in what was almost a rebuilding year. At least they're not on the hook for Deion Branch's bloated contract, though the Asante Samuel decision is going to be very interesting (I think he might get the Brady/Seymour treatment in the end - a stud corner still in his prime is someone they need to retain). I also think the Pats would like to keep Corey Dillon around (still superb as a pass blocker), but he needs to trim down a touch - on the balance sheet, that is.

Okay, I've danced around things a bit, softened up the defense. Now you can be Marion Barber and run over people. What's the story, Jersey?

From: Michael Salfino <Salfino@comcast.net>
Date: January 30, 2007 11:55:38 PM EST
To: scott pianowski <spianow@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Super Breakfast

It's funny you talk about The Departed because Cath (my wife) went to see it today when the kids were at school and loved it. But she was laughing throughout the third act of The History of Violence (no joke). I better hide the kitchen knives or learn to sleep with one eye open.

The Browns-Broncos games arguably were better, especially the second one culminating with Ernest Byner's fumble. But those games are tarnished by the fact that everyone knew the winner was very unlikely to win the Super Bowl. Plus, they featured one Hall of Fame QB, though Ohio might have begged to differ in the immediate aftermath of each of those heartbreaking losses.

Lots of great Super Bowl moments in Miami. But, except for the official coronation of Manning as an unquestionably great player, I don't think this game will rank as one. But the historical significance may end up transcending the game itself much like the Jets win over the Colts did in Super Bowl III (also held in Miami). I'm not comparing Namath to Manning, mind you. Just the fact that there's a bigger story here.

Miami has mostly been a great Super Setting. After Super Bowl III, you had SB V in Miami won by the Colts on a last-second field goal, X won by Lynn Swann and the Steelers over Dallas in a game not quite as good as the score (21-17 indicated), XIII won by the Steelers again over Dallas 35-31 (again, not as dramatic as the score indicated but a solid game), XXIII won by Montana-to-Taylor in the last minute over Cincy.... But the last two games there have been stinkers, the Niners massacre of San Diego in XXIX and the Broncos dismantling of the Falcons in Elway's last game.

Enough history. Time for current events. Let's start by talking about the things that most matter. The last three years of regular season data proves that games are most likely to be won or lost via the passing game, turnovers and moving the ball consistently into the red zone.

So, we'll focus on those matchups first. The passing game is no contest. Manning vs. the Bears defense might seem good on paper when you factor in the Bears season ranking in YPA allowed. But, recently, this defense has faired poorly. Drew Brees cut them up for long stretches of the game and looked like he was ready to put the dagger in Chicago halfway through that third quarter. The Rams, Bucs, Patriots and Seahawks all more or less had their way with the Bears defense post-Tommy Harris' injury. And even if you accept the Bears defense at the face value of the season rankings without adjusting for strength of schedule and recent trends, Manning has mostly shredded the many top pass defenses he's faced all year. The Colts have scored just about as many points in these seven games (on a per-game basis) as they have in all the others (winning six of the seven games). Manning has proven to be able to raise his game against hot defenses. And our list of top defenses doesn't even include the Broncos, who were on a record-setting pace in limiting points until Manning jabbed them senseless with the precision passing game.

Bears backers will note that Chicago is No. 5 in our Shutdown Stats (courtesy of TwoMinuteWarning.com). The past five Super Bowl winners all finished in the top five in this category (Indy was 13th in the regular season). But I think Chicago's ranking is a fluke. Again, their schedule was relatively easy and they still gave up 13 TD passes to No. 1 and No. 2 receivers. They rank so high because they had 11 picks on passes to top targets. But Manning has those interceptions out of his system, I think. Expect Reggie Wayne and Marvin Harrison to both be productive, though Harrison has clearly lost a step (Asante Samuel really shut him down completely in the championship game).

Rex Grossman vs. the Colts is trouble for Chicago. Bad matchup here. Grossman really relies on big plays. Almost 12 percent of his completions were over 25 yards. The Colts gave up one play more than 25 yards the entire postseason (a 27-yarder to Ben Watson, I believe). Also, the Colts gave up big passing plays on just six percent of completions, the lowest rate in football. So, Grossman is going to have to be consistent and efficient. How can anyone bet that this will happen.

Turnovers are interesting. The Bears forced 44 during the regular season. But forced implies caused and plays into the belief that defense dictates outcomes when all the evidence says that, generally, the offense dictates outcomes. Maybe the Bears were lucky or maybe their opponents were just ridiculously sloppy. Much is made about how good they are at getting on the ball quickly when making tackles. They recovered 20 fumbles, the most in the league. But the Jaguars have an effective and active defense and recovered four fumbles. I think fumbles are totally random events. Now watch the Colts fumble five times and throw the game away like the Saints did. Interceptions really matter a lot. But, again, I think the offense controls this. Manning has been uncharacteristically sloppy in January, but I'd be shocked if he threw more than one pick and the Bears are going to need two or three to have a chance. Grossman, though, is going to be forcing things downfield into the teeth of the Colts defense because he's got no game otherwise.

The Colts will move the ball into the red zone with regularity and the Bears better hope they force a bunch of field goals. Indy averaged about four red zone possessions a game, the most in the league. (When you score outside the red zone, that doesn't even count.) Manning scores TDs 66 percent of the time when there, too (second best behind the Chargers). The Bears defense was ninth in preventing red zone TDs, but New England's was second and where did that get them? The Patriots were also better than Chicago in preventing red zone possessions. I'm beginning to convinced myself that the Colts are scoring 30 points and once it gets up there in a Super Bowl it often gets ugly in a hurry.

The Bears pass rush isn't anything special since Harris was sidelined, but they generated great pressure on Drew Brees, who was as hard to sack as Manning during the regular season. They blitzed Brees, though. No one blitzes Manning and lives to tell about it. I've said this before but it's my favorite stat of the year. No, not the 12 TDs and no picks on 119 passes when blitzed. It's not the 127.4 QB rating when blitzed either. It's that Manning was less likely to be sacked when you blitzed him than when you didn't and Manning was sacked once every 37 attempts during the regular season. So, yes, he was sacked THREE TIMES in 122 blitzes. What do you do if you're Chicago? Stopping Manning is like solving the riddle of the Sphinx.

I'd talk about the pointlessness of the running game. But I'm bored now with this. Every single stat backs it up. All the objective data. But you know we're going to hear announcers talking about dominating the line of scrimmage and keeping Manning off the field and yada yada yada. Or we'll be treated to the spin that the Colts became a champion only when they finally figured out a way to stop the run. Give it up, guys. Open your eyes. Reality beckons. Look, if the Bears rush for 200 yards, they'll have a chance to win. But that's not happening. And even that just gives them a chance because rushing for that kind of yardage rarely results in the 25-plus points they'll need regardless. To win, Chicago needs Grossman to go off or Manning to self-destruct. Can it happen? Maybe you disagree, but I say no way. I think everything is trending Indy. My computer says Colts 27, Bears 19. I say Colts 34, Bears 13.

From: "scott pianowski" <spianow@gmail.com>
Date: January 31, 2007 5:27:32 PM EST
To: "Michael Salfino" <Salfino@comcast.net>
Subject: sunshine superman

One thing decided for certain during The Departed - Matt Damon plays Tom Brady in any future movie. Ironically, Colin Sullivan (Matt Damon's character) spent much of the movie in Brady's old apartment.

I get excited talking about those old Denver teams because John Elway was probably my favorite player growing up, someone who could beat you any number of ways. Elway had very good weapons at the end of his career but certainly not during the first decade or so; he went to the Hall of Fame despite his skill guys, not because of them. It would have been nice to see Dan Reeves exit the scene quicker; Elway is to Reeves as Michael Jordan is to Dean Smith.

You make an excellent point that the Pittsburgh-Dallas Super Bowls of the 1970s weren't as close as people tend to remember. Late, cosmetic scores trick the history books; the same theme crept into Ohio State-Michigan this year, a game that wasn't quite as good as 42-39 wants to suggest. The 1970s reminiscing makes me misty-eyed for our Swann-Stallworth throwdown of a few seasons ago, which needs to be in BT archives someday.

What, the game? If we must. We're headed towards a bland table of sorts because we're going to agree too much. Chicago's pass defense only looks good if you factor in all of the first-half results with Harris (and Mike Brown). When Tim Rattay, Jon Kitna and Brett Favre are cutting you up, time to get worried. Maybe Marvin Harrison doesn't have a playoff resume we can get excited about (no TD in 12 of 13 starts; just 299 yards in his last seven games), but Manning will throw to whoever is open. If it's Reggie Wayne, fine. If it's Dallas Clark, cool. If it's Aaron Moorehead or Ricky Proehl or Roger Carr or Lydell Mitchell, I don't think it much matters.

Maybe teams are onto something with this two-headed backfield approach - you always have a fresh guy in the mix, while the defensive fronts eventually wear down. I guess that's my way of saying "show me to the Dominic Rhodes props" (though Addai is the guy I want next August). Chicago's run stopping was never the strength of this unit anyway. The over/under on the Colts is 27.5 but I say they clear that, maybe easily. Put them in the 30s for the moment.

You've nailed it on the other side of the ball - Grossman's best days featured deep connections, but the Colts above all else won't get beat deep. Can Chicago put together a handful of patient scoring drives, string together 13, 15, 16 plays? On Grossman's wing, I have my doubts. And while Chicago can and will run on the Colts, it's not going to be enough to win the game. Grossman has to play well for the Bears to have a chance.

The turnover question is a tricky one - how much credit does any team deserve for takeaways? A pass rush plays into this, and playing with a lead for sure. I will give the Bears credit for attacking the ball and aggressively stripping whenever possible - I do think it's possible to do this better than other teams, even as every defense makes the attempt. The Bears know they need multiple takeaways to have a chance here. But how many can you realistically hope for when the most reliable QB in the league is on the other side?

Manning handled the ball 590 times this year and had just 25 negative plays (nine picks, 14 sacks, two fumbles). That's obscenely good. As you outlined earlier, any blitz of Manning is basically a birthday present. Unless he's sabotaged by his skill guys (or the special teams unit), I can't see how the coronation doesn't happen. Colts 34, Bears 20.

And trust me on those Rhodes props.