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."
Rolling (Week) Sevens with Tiki
 From: Michael Salfino <salfino@comcast.net>
Date: October 17, 2006 9:25:23 AM EDT
To: scott pianowski <spianow@gmail.com>
Subject: Week 7 Breakfast
How sick was the Bears-Cardinals game? Don't you just feel bad for the Cardinals fans, all happy and excited in their new stadium and then that kick to the stomach?
But St. Louis fared little better in their trade of the Cardinals for the Rams, as Bulger's Boys suffered their own brutal loss and then had to watch their remaining Cardinals get bludgeoned by the Mets' Carloses. The Bengals were screwed in their heartbreaker at Tampa Bay (I'm beginning to see a theme to this Heartbreak Breakfast). I'm so sick of the roughing the passer calls that I just want to go back to the days where Ben Davidson could break Joe Namath's jaw with a forearm shiver and not even get a flag. Does the Redskins loss qualify as a heartbreak given how badly outplayed they were? So much for my belief in that coaching staff, which sees something in Mark Brunell that clearly isn't there. The Saints were on the right side of the heartbreak equation. I'm starting to believe, unless you can talk me out of it. It was the perfect spot for a Philly letdown, but.... Do you think Atlanta realizes how hopeless things are with Michael Vick? That they'll never be able to come from behind or mount a significant passing attack? Or are they just going to shrug Sunday off? And maybe I just hate the Giants as much as Vick (the QB, not the RB). But I wasn't as impressed as I'm being told I should be. When did Jake Plummer turn into Trent Dilfer circa January 2001? I can't call him even a caretaker right now as much as a potted plant. With all the byes, that's about it for this week. If I missed something, throw it on the grill with those flapjacks and sausages. You get to incorporate the trading deadline into your reply. If Doug Gabriel is now the assistant GM in New England as he appears to want to be in these newspaper interviews, then Randy Moss (and/or Jerry Porter) might be Foxboro bound. Week 7 Breakfast is served.  From: "scott pianowski" <spianow@gmail.com>
Date: October 18, 2006 2:48:06 PM EDT
To: "Michael Salfino" <salfino@comcast.net>
Subject: don't call it a comeback
Best batch of games all year, no doubt about that. Lots to dive into, hopefully I can keep my reply shorter than Al Saunders' playbook.
I felt more than my fair share of Schaudenfreude after the Cardinals handed away the Monday nighter. Has any team ever lose three home games in four weeks like Arizona has?
Edge got the workload he wanted and obviously he didn't do anything with it, though it's not all his fault with the shoddy line in front of him (give James credit for a bunch of great blitz pickups). Matt Leinart can't have any doubters now. The Cards need to junk the running game and start throwing 40 times a week because you can creatively mask a week line in the pass game. Ladies may love Cool James, but this group isn't going to run on anyone consistently.
Denny Green, welcome to the sound byte hall of fame. (Give credit to the PR guy who calmly mentioned Leinart's timetable right after Green erupted). Ultimately Green's involvement is the reason why I shamelessly enjoyed the Arizona meltdown - I've always seen him as a fraud. Perhaps he can emotionally lead men, but anyone who's ever heard his TV and radio work will tell you this guy has a fuzzy understanding of the modern game. In a perfect world you want a guy who mixes the emotional with the logical and intellectual, someone like Bill Cowher or Mike Shanahan. Is there any way Green stays in the desert to open the 2007 season?
The Rams and Seahawks probably played the best game of the year, all those lead changes late. Give Matt Hasselbeck a lot of credit for his clutch throws in the second half, on the road, without a running game, with a good pass rush in his grill. Of course if Josh Brown doesn't drill all those bombs, today's discussion is different. I hope this is the year Marc Bulger stays healthy all year because he throws the prettiest medium and deep ball in the league.
The penalty on the Tampa Bay drive annoys me to no end. I want every critical flag to be justified by the video, and here's one case where it clearly isn't. Even Ronde Barber of the Bucs shrugged and admitted it was a flimsy call that shouldn't have been made. Give Jon Gruden credit for rallying his troops the last two weeks and challenging the Saints and Bengals; Tampa's season is already shot but they're going to be a tricky out for most teams. This was the wrong year to be matched up with the NFC South as your random division.
Staying in the Barber Shop, how about Tiki running over, under, through and past a pretty good Falcon defense en route to 227 total yards? The lesson we get from Barber is that hits in the NFL come with varying degrees - his longevity can be directly tied to knowing how to avoid punishing, square hits. Mind you, he's taken enough punishment to think about retiring after the year, but people made a mistake when they compared Barber to head-on backs like Earl Campbell before the season. Apples and oranges.
I watched the Atlanta tape expecting to skewer Michael Vick, but I think he played a little better than the numbers show. His receivers dropped a slew of balls on him (Michael Jenkins had an easy long TD slip through his fingers), and the line was abused by the suddenly-resurgent Giants pass rush. That all said, you know I'm in the Matt Schaub camp with you and I can't wait until the Falcons reset the offense in 2007 or 2008 or whenever they feel the urgency. (The ghoulish in the crowd suggest the other way we'll see Schaub in there; we all know Vick is asking for trouble with some of those crazy scrambles.)
Mark Brunell couldn't beat the punt-pass-and-kick winner these days. It's so much easier to defend a team that can't work the entire field. Baltimore's offense has been in the same funk - Steve McNair's arm isn't made for the throws outside the numbers, which is why he's forcing everything to the tight ends. Yikes, is Kyle Boller really an upgrade? And for that matter, did Jim Fassel did a raw deal, or is Brian Billick doing the right thing?
Maybe Billick should have fired his entire defensive staff. Baltimore gambled with a lot of man coverage with Steve Smith and we know how that turned out. I like Jake Delhomme just fine but when he marches into Baltimore and throws for 365, something's wrong with the Ravens. On the other side for Carolina, Julius Peppers is quietly turning into the monster we all expected a few years back. Second City, this is the team you should be scared of.
Give Sean Payton the Coach of the Year hardware right now. It's stunning how he's doing it with an ordinary roster, especially that defense. I openly questioned the platoon idea of Deuce McAllister and Reggie Bush but he's making it work. I've always liked Drew Brees but he's come back from the shoulder problem quicker than anyone could have expected (at least that's what Miami says). The offensive line looked horrible in the summer but Payton's done a masterful job making the most of what he has. I guess I'm the last person to give this team the benefit of the doubt, but let me on the bus.
Shanahan's another guy doing a very smart job coaching to his situation (rather than forcing his system on a roster that can't accommodate it). Why not keep Jake Plummer on a short leash? Why not let your defense win the game if your offense has limitations? Mind you I bet Shanny can't wait to get Jay Cutler out of the box to the playbook can expand again in 2007 or 2008, but like it or not, this year's Broncos are going to bore us all to death while they win a bunch of 13-3 games.
Speed Round: When I finally accepted the Rex Grossman reinvention, he goes Leaf on me. What gives? . . . Oakland had to move one of its problem wideouts this week, so I guess in a way it makes perfect sense that the Raiders didn't do anything. The NFL is supposed to be a reshuffle league, but I can't see how this rudderless ship makes the playoffs the rest of the decade . . . For a guy that has 17 physical ailments at all times, Laveranues Coles makes a lot of big plays . . . If Tiki gets 2,000 total yards this year then walks away, I think that's enough to put him in the Hall of Fame argument. You with me there? . . . I mocked the Titans as much as anyone, so in fairness I'll tip the cap to Jeff Fisher for keeping his group together. I'm not going to throw a parade for any 1-5 team, but they've been competitive in four of the games. And where did this Travis Henry run come from? . . . Anquan Boldin, what a player. Maybe the Cardinals will finally commit this guy to all offensive snaps from now on. Nah, that would be logical.
From: Michael Salfino <salfino@comcast.net>
Date: October 18, 2006 5:19:33 PM EDT
To: scott pianowski <spianow@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: don't call it a comeback
The Cardinals are some relatively minor adjustments away from being mediocre, which makes you a playoff contender most years. The changes have to start, as you intimated, with more first-down passing. Right now, the Cards run on 62 percent of first-down snaps. That's silly. They also have to throw more when they get in close. They've snapped 17 plays inside the opponents' 10-yard-line and run on 12 of them. That's not playing to your strengths.
But I'm not buying the idea that they should just throw to Anquan Boldin, assuming that wasn't a joke. It may have been, as you always bash me for saying that teams should throw on every play (even though I never really say that). So how could you seriously suggest that a team throw to one receiver on every play? Remember the Randy Ratio? If anything, the Cardinals problem is they throw to Boldin too much. There's too much quantity to his plays, not enough quality (31 of his catches are within 10 yards from scrimmage, 10 behind the line). Boldin has to use his great skills on higher leverage plays. You can't design an NFL passing game with a fixation on avoiding incompletions (completion percentage is the most overrated passing stat by a million miles).
The biggest myth about the passing game is that a good one requires a good running game. There is just about zero correlation to yards per carry and yard per passing attempt. You can always count on macho defenders and coaches overcompensating to even the mere suggestion of a run.
I love watching Marc Bulger and Torry Holt operate. It's one of the joys of a lazy Sunday autumn afternoon. These guys put on an old-school clinic with that intermediate passing game from sideline to sideline. Put them both on any team in any era and they'd run secondaries ragged.
The word now is that Chris Simms is on the outs and Gruden is in love with Gradkowski. I saw a predictable amount of attrition in his performance last week. When it takes you 44 attempts to generate 184 yards, you basically have no passing game. But a win masks this sort of ugliness. The bigger story there, and one we haven't touched on all year, is the Bengals continuing offensive woes. It's a shame because the defense is good enough to win if the offense can come close to capturing 2005 form. There's too much talent to keep Cincy down for long; so, I think they're a sleeper team.
You're getting me all excited thinking about Vick being given the heave ho. But that's never going to happen. You know what Jerry Jones said last week when asked about Terrell Owens? "He's selling a lot of jerseys." I'm starting to think these business decisions bleed on to the field a lot more than purists like us wish to concede.
I don't want to sound snarky after taking you to task for the Boldin comment, which very likely was mere hyperbole. But the notion that the slippery guys that don't take big hits are somehow immune to injury doesn't make any sense the more you think about it. First off, there aren't that many vicious collisions involving running backs each week no matter how the guy runs stylistically. Secondly, guys hardly ever get seriously hurt when they do get blasted in some head-on collision. Maybe a concussion, but those twisted knees that lead to arthritis or worse, the broken foots or ankles, those are things that happen sometimes without even any contact. Or they happen when you get hit the wrong way from a guy you haven't even seen, let alone tried to avoid. Any one who's made it as long as Barber without a significant injury is just damn lucky, that's it. There's no skill. Brian Westbrook doesn't avoid "punishing, square hits"? He's always hurt. James Brooks lost it overnight at age 32 without even getting hurt. No one avoided punishing, square hits better than Gale Sayers and he lasted about five minutes (but it sure was fun while it lasted). Running backs come with an expiration date and Barber is past due. Let's see how he's running (if he's running) in December.
Let me continue a little with this before the speed answers to your speed questions. You mention Campbell, who had more carries than Barber has now and when Campbell had about the 1890 or so that Tiki entered the the season with, he was closing out a 1,300 yard season (in 14 games) with 12 TDs. Then, the bottom fell out. "All the punishing hits" is the story line for those who refuse to except that playing RB in the NFL is a game of Russian Roulette.
Looking at it another way, what's the odds that a running back gets seriously hurt on a carry? One percent? That's too high. How about one-tenth of one percent? (And, remember, you're the big one for sitting guys down after they've clinched everything so I can't imagine you think the injury risk is much less than that.) So that's a serious injury every 1,000 carries on average. Not scientific for sure, but it feels right when you look at NFL history. Whatever the odds actually are, you can beat them no matter your style -- Jim Brown never had even a nick and was a very, um, confrontational runner (when you go an entire career without ever being tackled for a loss, you are not avoiding contact); Sayers rolled snake eyes very early in the game. But it's luck. It's like the gin-joint, chain smoker who eats fish and chips every day and lives to be 100.
This may sound silly, but Barber made the Pro Bowl only twice. That's not enough to get into the Hall. And I don't think he was unfairly left off any squads, but maybe I'm wrong. If you're not one of the top two or three backs in your conference for at least five or six years, how do you get a bust?
Vince Young is the football story in Tennessee. Travis Henry is the fantasy story, but that bores me for Breakfast.
Rex Grossman's week was interesting. Perhaps he's regressing to the mean, but we don't really know what his mean is. So, I need more data. Looking more closely at his '06, the YPA hasn't been great after the first two weeks against the Packers and Lions (who both stink against the pass). But the Niners, Dolphins, Giants, Jets and Patriots all have problems against the pass. The Vikings and Rams are nothing to write home about either. Those are Grossman's next seven games after the bye. So, I'm still bullish.
From: "scott pianowski" <spianow@gmail.com>
Date: October 18, 2006 6:11:40 PM EDT
To: "Michael Salfino" <salfino@comcast.net>
Subject: going back to tiki
You misunderstood my Boldin point, mostly because my reference was vague to begin with (my fault). I was making a (somewhat veiled, unfortunately) reference to the Cardinals taking Boldin off the field in goal-line packages earlier in the year. I'm not suggesting the team should throw to Boldin every play, but he better damn well be on the field every snap.
I'm not going to hold Kurt Warner-related stats against Boldin. Leinart has made two starts and in those games Boldin has 16 catches, 207 yards and two scores on 25 targets. I don't see anything wrong with that. There's a lot wrong with this offense, but Leinart-to-Boldin isn't the problem - just keep the best friggin' player on the field, Arizona.
As for our Tiki throwdown, I'll concede that a lot of injuries in football are random, fluke plays that can't be forecast or seen ahead of time. That said, my point on Barber is that he's one of the backs that understands how to minimize the net effect that his body takes from regular NFL punishment. I think there's a distinction here. It's not that Barber is slippery per se, it's that he knows when to give up on the run and go into self-preservation mode.
When the doomsday calls were thrown at Barber all over the map in August, most people pointed to his age (31) and his heavy usage the last four years. People were piling on his age and his mileage. My point is that I don't think the Barber mileage is as taxing as the mileage on some other backs, and I'm not surprised that he's excelling again this year.
I'll give that Earl Campbell's loud seasons made more impact than Barber's, but Barber certainly had a better career. Barber will retire with more yards and a higher YPC, and Tiki was a much better receiver and blocker than Campbell, not even close. Of course Campbell gets the advantage of being in our memories, forever young and spry, running over people on highlight films with nifty NFL Films music in the background. No one wants to talk about the times the Steelers rendered Campbell a non-factor in the playoffs. I am not saying Campbell doesn't deserve his bust because he certainly does, but if this is the measuring stick to beat, Barber beats it.
Hall of Fame discussions are interesting but tricky in that there's a lot of disagreement on what the criteria should be. I've always been of the school that short-term dominance deserves the nod over long-term quality without the stardom. Get Jim Rice in the Baseball Hall, take Tony Perez out, that sore of thing.
With that in mind, I think Barber's recent years of ridiculous production (he's led the league in yards from scrimmage the last two years, he was fourth in 2002) deserve consideration. Mind you Barber absolutely needs one more year like this, but if he's among the yards-from-scrimmage leaders again at the end of 2006, he's made a convincing argument. What if he's first again? How could a back lead the league in yards from scrmmage three straight years and *not* be in Canton?
Since when did Pro Bowl counts become so important? Hall-of-Famer John Riggins went to one. Lynn Swann (maybe the most overrated skill player in modern history), three. Charlie Joiner, three. You want to impeach any of those guys? (Actually I think all three of them might be flimsy - we had that classic Swann-Stallworth throwdown on BT Classic a few years ago - but that's not my point. I'm merely saying that Pro Bowl trips may not be all that important to the voters.)
I thought Chris Simms was the next up-and-coming star QB in Tampa Bay. Okay, it's not his fault he had his spleen removed by the Panthers. I'm skeptical on Gradkowski as you are. Maybe I don't trust quarterbacks who go bald prematurely.
Do you really see Owens in Dallas for the long haul? I don't. Even in a week where he scored three times there's controversy here, testiness. And want to talk about someone who gets hurt every year, it's Owens - one full season out of eight. I refuse to accept that it's a coincidence.
Vick's leash isn't going to last forever in Atlanta. The funny thing is that the team invested so much in getting him targets - they paid through the nose for Peerless Price, then they wasted No. 1 picks on Jenkins and White. To me, it's like buying a surf board when you don't live near the ocean. But I fully expect Schaub to be the guy here eventually, even if it's injury induced. Jim Mora can't make a change in the middle of 2006 perhaps, but I don't think he's going to wait forever.
I'm still bullish on Grossman because Bernard Berrian gets behind the secondary every week. Would Brian Griese have made all the throws in September that Grossman did? I'm starting to wonder.
From: Michael Salfino <salfino@comcast.net>
Date: October 19, 2006 10:45:36 AM EDT
To: scott pianowski <spianow@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: going back to tiki
Well, if you're running 70 percent of the time inside the opponent's 10, what do you need Boldin for? But they fired the OC now, so maybe some sanity will prevail. I'm pessimistic because that genius Denny Green decided it's better to have the offensive coordinator on the sideline (where you can't see crap).
Receivers like Boldin need to average at least 10 yards per target. Even with Leinart, that number isn't there. This is a finer point, as you mentioned. There are more pressing concerns. But Edgerrin James isn't going to start running and the line isn't going to start blocking, so more diversity and downfield throwing might be the only reasonable cure.
It's tough to compare different eras. But there's been a rushing yards per carry explosion in football that's similar to what happened with homers in baseball in the mid-1990s. Averaging over five yards per carry like Campbell did in his heyday was absolutely unheard of. It was Brown, Simpson, Payton and then Campbell. Tony Dorsett never did it. Some other guys may have with less carries, but not the workhorse guys. (I fondly remember that Bruce Harper averaged 6.9 per carry one year and I used him in Strat-O-Matic in a college tournament that I ended up winning because there was no limit to the plays I could give him). Today, the NFL game is dramatically different after 20-plus years of rule changes all favoring offense. Four guys averaged over 5.0 per carry in 2005 alone.
It's not the Pro Bowl that I care about. It's the idea that some respected body, whether writers or players, felt that you were one of the handful of best guys in your conference at your position for more years than two or three. Hall of Fame standards, for me, are at least this high. And I like this yardstick because it gets away from generational comparisons and puts players into the context of their times.
I'm expecting bad things for Owens in Dallas. The head coach isn't on board, which isn't a big secret.
I caught Marshall Faulk (who really shows me something on the generally unwatchable NFL Network) saying last night that the Falcons should rotate Matt Schaub in so they can generate some semblance of an NFL passing game. Wow! That's right, Marshall, THE EMPEROR HAS NO CLOTHES! Eisen asked if he could possibly be serious because "sending out Schaub would telegraph to the defense that you're going to throw." Faulk said, "Well, if it's third and nine, you're going to throw!" Classic.
Hey, I see Moyer over there listening to Wolfmother on his vintage 1986 Walkman, drinking Metamucil over his bowl of stale oatmeal. Let's sweet talk him into picking up our tab for these greasy links and eggs. That means U2 gets mentioned only if we're talking about spy planes over the old Soviet Union. |
