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."

Peyton, Pop 2 and Pancake Breakfast

From: Michael Salfino <salfino@comcast.net>
Date: November 7, 2006 10:11:56 AM EST
To: scott pianowski <spianow@gmail.com>
Subject: Week 10 Breakfast

Well, Tom Brady clearly can't win the big game.

I guess, the Colts, at 8-0, are the story this week and you would think I'd love it because this team breaks all the NFL rules that we both know are wrong. Again, as expressed by Art Shell through his Monday Night intermediaries in the broadcast booth last night: "Football's been the same for ever: if you want to win, you have to run and stop the run." And it's said with such matter-of-fact, dogmatic pride that the dying young man in me wants to scream. My emerging curmudgeon, though, snickers at the certainty that the world is a very willfully ignorant place. Of course, Manning breaks these rules. But he's boring me a little this year. Other than for about 10 minutes in the game against the Jags, I haven't had the sense all year that the Colts were even possibly going to lose any one of these "fantastic finishes."

So, the AFC is all but decided. Unless the Colts take off the entire month of December this time, they're going to the Super Bowl. There's a rush in the NFC to jump off the Chicago bandwagon. I have a strong belief that the loss of Brian Berrian for up to a month is very problematic for Grossman and the Bears.

The stage is set this week at the Meadowlands, where the Giants now have visions of clearing a path to the Number 1 seed that seemed impossible after Week 3. Of course, Big Blue has massive injury problems of its own.

In the NFC, 4-4 has you right in the thick of the playoff race. Which teams from among the Eagles, Cowboys, Vikings, Panthers and Rams may be interesting come January?

In the AFC, only three of the following are going to make it: Bengals, Jaguars, Broncos, Chiefs, Chargers. Who are we pulling for here at the Table? (In other words, who could even possibly win at Indy.)

I think we can make a nice buffet out of these Breakfast offerings, but if there's anything you don't see on top of the sterno in those warming trays, grab the gum-snapping, eye-rolling Jersey waitress and order it up. Week 10 Breakfast is served.

From: "scott pianowski" <spianow@gmail.com>
Date: November 8, 2006 10:56:32 AM EST
To: "Michael Salfino" <salfino@comcast.net>
Subject: color by numbers

I know we're both journalists who root for the story, and with that I was glad to see the Colts take care of business at New England, even as it spits at where I'm from and where my heart is supposed to be. I guess I read too many witless hacks playing the "Brady is clutch, Manning is a choker" card. Seriously, the people who wrote that mindless crap deserve to spontaneously combust. Are there more hacks writing on the NFL than any other sport? I'm starting to think it is so.

Mind you, Indy's win Sunday night was about much more than Manning - Marvin Harrison, to me, was the clear player of the night - but it's easier to write the game off as a Manning coronation, so that's what so many of the color-by-number writers do. Why think when you can fill in 10 blanks and have your column done in 15 minutes?

Let's move on to business. How good are these Colts? It's tidy to say, okay, they're 8-0, they've won at New England, at Denver, at the Giants, let's put them in the Super Bowl now and skip the holiday rush. But looking deeper, isn't this the weakest Colts team of the last three years? Last year's Indy team was 8-0 with a point differential of plus-131 and the defense had some teeeth, and the 2004 offense basically attacked the record book with an eraser. This year's point differential is only plus-59, the pass rush isn't there. Let's not forget all the trouble dispatching the Titans, Jaguars and Jets. Obviously the rushing defense has been a problem all year, and even with Bob Sanders back (a major addition), New England still got what it wanted down the middle last week. Did the Patriots give up on the run too quickly? How much will this fundamental flaw hurt the Colts in January? Or maybe the Colts can thumb their noses up at conventional wisdom and win anyway. I'm also not in love with the Indy corners - good teams will always throw on these guys.

The team the Colts don't want to see in January is the Chargers. San Diego has the right kind of defense to throw at Indy, a 3-4 scheme that can pressure the pocket without devoting extra people to the task. That's the best chance you have at detaining Manning (I don't think anyone stops him anymore). The Chargers also have the kind of offense that will cause Indy fits - two dynamic backs, and that giant matchup problem called Antonio Gates. The wideouts are solid enough. If I'm Tony Dungy, I'm hoping someone else takes out these guys. (The Chargers would be more dangerous if Drew Brees were still running the show, but Philip Rivers has picked things up a lot quicker than I expected.)

Indy rates a healthy edge on everyone else in the conference. We know the Broncos match up terribly with them (no pass rush, and I guess the secondary depth isn't there yet). Manning isn't sweating the Patriots anymore, not after beating them twice in a row at their place. And I can't take the Ravens seriously even at 6-2 - hobbling Steve McNair is under six yards per attempt, Jamal Lewis does nothing for me. The offensive line is also spotty - I'm thinking this Ravens offense is just as weak as the Super Bowl winner, but the defense has dropped a couple of levels since then. This story won't have legs in January.

Jacksonville and Kansas City are pretty easy to discount. The Jaguars don't play well enough on the road and they won't throw the ball successfully enough to win multiple playoff games. When your cry for help leads you to David Garrard, upside is limited. Oh yeah, but he just wins, right, got it. As for the Chiefs, they'll get torpedoed by their secondary eventually - and I think they're one playmaker short on offense. Damon Huard is a great story and Larry Johnson doesn't seem to care who his tackles are - he's steamrolling people again - but do you trust this defense to keep any good offense under 28 points? Neither do I.

The NFC is very much up for grabs and I'm not ruling anyone out yet. We've seen Rex Grossman wet his pants twice in a month - once at Arizona (!) and once at home against Miami - and that's enough to give the rest of the conference hope. If the Giants were completely healthy for this week's game I'd expect them to win easily Sunday night, but the two sack-happy ends are hurt and that changes the equation significantly.

The Bears are lucky the conference doesn't hand out at-large bids because there are so many dangerous 4-4 teams in this conference. Philadelphia should be 6-2, Dallas should be at least 5-3, and the Panthers wouldn't be 4-4 if Steve Smith hadn't gotten hurt in August. All of these teams can wreck havoc on your pocket, and I could see any of them throwing on the Bears, too. On a neutral field I'd essentially call any of them a pick em' with Chicago, but fortunately for the Bears they're not all making the party. I don't think the Eagles can overcome the schedule to make the playoffs (they end the year with six killers), and Dallas has a tricky road as well. I still expect the Panthers to rally and find a way to 10 wins, but maybe I'm letting recent history count for too much and not giving them enough red ink for their flaws. I hate their linebackers, for one thing.

The Falcons are the jokers in the NFC deck, a unique team in lots of ways, a very tricky matchup. A lot of people are jumping off the Michael Vick bandwagon after the hiccup at Detroit, but I reviewed the tape and save for 2-3 plays I actually thought he played very well (he's definitely thinking "throw first, run second" off his movement, which is the biggest key of all). The Atlanta wideouts are terrible, though - they drop every third pass like clockwork, and even Alge Crumpler got into the act against the Lions. Is John Abraham ever coming back? The biggest issue with Atlanta is that when the pass rush disappears, it's pretty easy to expose the weaker corners. But I guess you can say that about 90 percent of the league.

Speed round: If I hear that Mellencamp song five more times, I'm taking a hostage . . . I don't think much of Art Shell as a coach, but he's probably the best blocker on the roster . . . Javon Walker has proven a lot of people wrong, no one more than me. I thought he had effectively zero chance to come back this soon and to this level . . . I've been admiring Sean Payton's wonderful job all season, but his best trick was getting opposing defenses to take Reggie Bush seriously for two months. Gotcha . . . I can't stand NBC's cheesy theme song, but otherwise their telecast is so much better than ESPN's, it's not even funny. The next time I see a mediocre matchup slated for Monday night, I'm headed for the movies . . . Add Bill Parcells to the list of coaches who don't understand the 2-point conversion and when to take the card out of the pocket.

From: Michael Salfino <salfino@comcast.net>
Date: November 8, 2006 7:58:46 PM EST
To: scott pianowski <spianow@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: color by numbers

I'd guess there are more people writing about the NFL than any other sport. And with so much time to fill between games, there's more "analysis" in football writing than in, say, baseball. So there's going to be more hacks here than anywhere else, unfortunately. But it is depressing that people repeat the same myths over and over with the credulity we'd expect from children or ancient tribes. I wouldn't flinch if I read on SI.com or anywhere else of note that the Colts need to sacrifice Peyton Manning's right arm to the sky god of Thunder and Running Game in order to finally win that elusive AFC Championship.

Manning keeps getting better, so the Colts are pretty damn good. If you're going to have a good chance to beat him even on Any Given Sunday, you're very likely going to have to outpass him at least in terms of efficiency. How is anyone going to do that without the help of weather? Yes, Roethlisberger did it last year, but the Steelers were No. 1 in both YPA and points per attempt last year. This year, the Colts are No. 1 in both categories. Maybe the Eagles could do it if Manning was slightly below average that week, but that's not until the Super Bowl (their regular-season matchup isn't that meaningful for the Colts and they can't play them again until February, which gets Manning over the first major hurdle). No one is outpassing Manning in Indy in the AFC, including San Diego, who is seventh and 13th overall in these key stats. Brady can't with those receivers without the help of weather. Plus, Manning has Belichick figured out and Belichick knows it, which is why he coached that game like he needed a TD on every drive.

I think this is maybe the best of the recent Colts teams. Look at who they've already beaten: maybe the best team in the NFC, at the Giants, at the Patriots, a Jaguars team that is very feisty when a the top of their game, as they were that week; and at a good Denver team. I personally never felt for one second that they were going to lose any of these games (subjective, I know, but I have no rooting interest in Indy).

I can't take the Chargers seriously until they post one win that's the equal to any of the four I cited by the Colts (remember, three of those wins were on the road). Look at that joke of a schedule for San Diego. They only have one game all year that will impress me if they win, at Denver in a couple of weeks. At Cincy this week is a mild test, but I don't have much faith in Cincy because Carson Palmer isn't right (as I predicted most of the summer until I overcompensated slightly after that first preseason game).

I'm a little more bullish on the Ravens than you, even though I agree they're not a serious threat to Manning. They remind me of the Bengals last year in their reliance on interceptions (on pace for 34 this year), the most underrated stat in football. And they are getting them and returning them to win games, not as a mere product of games they've already basically won. But Peyton Manning isn't throwing picks against anyone, sorry.

The Chiefs pass defense has really back slid the last few weeks. That's too big a problem for them to overcome, I agree. But Herm and his staff have done a great job considering Green's injury. And I have to credit Peterson, too, for finding Huard, who I trashed after Green got hurt (but who could have known).

The Jaguars are a little bit of a wild card in that they play very well at Indy, so they won't go there half-expecting to lose. Yes, we invest too much importance into whether the QB wins, but Garrard is better than Leftwich, I think (even though it's mostly because Leftwich is just so badly overrated, especially as a thrower). The Jags are doing the right thing, even though it's for the wrong reasons.

Dallas is the best of the 4-4 teams, I think, not Philly (who are pretty good, I'll admit). The only thing holding Dallas back is the net picks, but I suspect that Romo is going to protect the ball a lot better prospectively. Dallas dominates in many areas. The offense is exciting with the dimension Romo adds. I'm not completely buying him yet, but I'm well on my way. He would have had a huge day last week if T.O. held on to that 70-yard TD bomb.

The Falcons are about minus-one yard in net YPA, which typically correlates to about six or seven wins. That's impossible to overcome without a huge turnover edge. A agree that Abraham's loss is a big part of the problem, but his groin problems are chronic. One might reasonably argue that a lot of big Vick runs aren't factored into these net passing stats even though they start out as passes. I'll buy that, to a point. But only to get the Falcons to the periphery of mere playoff (as opposed to championship) contention.

You're right about Shell. And offensive line coach Jackie Slater is no doubt the second best Raiders blocker on the field, too. But what about Shell telling Kornheiser that "the game never changes, you run and defend the run and you win." Wasn't Shell paying attention on all those bombs to Mr. Speed Kills, Cliff Branch? Those old Raiders teams with Stabler had the most dangerous passing game in football every year. That's why they won, especially when they had Lester Hayes and Michael Haynes shutting down opposing wideouts.

I had a feeling when Dallas lined up for the two that we'd be talking about it. You know what spurred it? The safety. Parcells wanted those points back. But you can't chase after that stuff. Did you see King this week writing that Romo's running makes it a plus-50 percent play and thus demands going for two after every TD? That's crazy talk. There is no QB that gets you over 50 percent from the two and a half yard line. Rolling out the QB is overrated there, too. You don't have a good-enough pass option because the already small field gets cut in half once more.

From: "scott pianowski" <spianow@gmail.com>
Date: November 9, 2006 3:17:09 AM EST
To: "Michael Salfino" <salfino@comcast.net>
Subject: once in a lifetime

I certainly don't think this has been the best Indy team of the decade, not based on the eight marking periods we've seen in 2006. We're all sick of talking about the run defense. Dwight Freeney might as well be in the witness protection program. The coaching staff has stubbornly made Joseph Addai share the work when he's ready to handle a lot more. The offense doesn't have the slot magic of Brandon Stokley anymore, though Dallas Clark isn't bad as Stokley light.

But Manning has never been better. The numbers may not support it but if you consider the full context (the weapons aren't the same as 2004's), this stands as his watershed year. His finisher at the Meadowlands gave you goosebumps, didn't it? I watched that second half Denver tape a few times and I don't think a QB can play better. A few of Manning's plays at Foxboro are going to stick with me for a while, too (along with Harrison's ballet in the left corner of the end zone). It's grossly unfair that Manning isn't universally hailed, praised, and treasured, but winning a title would go a long way to fixing that. Michael Jordan, Dean Smith, Phil Mickelson, Steve Young, the Madden Raiders - all of them carried silly labels around until they eventually kicked the door down. Then everyone could give in, celebrate, appreciate.

I just don't see why we have to wait. Let's appreciate the once-in-a-generation brilliance we're seeing every week. They don't play forever, amigos. (And since I'm preaching to the choir, let's move on.)

It's game on for the Chargers, who get five legitimate tests in the next seven weeks (trips to Cincinnati and Seattle, the Denver deuce, and Kansas City). Hey, it's not their fault the schedule fell how it did. You play who they tell you to play. Nonetheless I think it's worth noting that the Ravens are the only defense that's come close to holding this offense down, and that was before the training wheels came off Philip Rivers. We know what the blueprint is for beating the Colts because these guys laid it down last year in Week 15.

Okay, I'm more than a little bit tempted to take the easy way out and call for Marty to mess this up somehow, but now that Rivers has his driver's license, it's a very dangerous group. And again, I think they're the nightmare matchup for the Colts on both sides of the ball. I'm not saying San Diego would win at Indy in January, but on paper I'd give them the best chance.

What's the selling point I'm missing on the Ravens? They're not going to score every week on defense, are they? The offense doesn't make enough chunks, no real explosive plays. Todd Heap isn't a bad tight end, fine, but the wideouts are average on their best day, and really below average given that McNair can't make all the throws anymore. Brian Billick is the only guy who hasn't gotten the memo on Jamal Lewis. Maybe the 2000 defense could bail these guys out, but this unit is a step or two below that (Ray Lewis and Chris McAlister might be the two most overrated defensive players in the league). You know Adalius Thomas must be pretty good, though, because even the Starbucks King has noticed.

I feel like The Grinch saying anything bad about Damon Huard, the feel good story of the AFC. No one say this coming and he's an easy guy to root for. But when you examine the resume line by line, I wonder how real this all is. Four of his five big games came against bad defenses, San Diego the only exception. He laid an egg at Denver and at Pittsburgh. The Chiefs get a legitimate defensive challenge from every road game left on their schedule (and no, I'm not kidding about Miami and Oakland). Is this a four-month story or a two-month story? I'm not ready to commit.

I'm never been a Jack Del Rio guy but I give him credit for whacking Byron Leftwich in the middle of the year. David Garrard may or may not be the answer, but I don't think Leftwich has any untapped upside left. The slow, mechanical release has always turned me off, and I don't think he throws the most accurate or catchable ball, either. Jacksonville would probably be the joker in the AFC deck if the defense had stayed healthy, but they've lost too many guys there to make a deep January run.

Count me in on Tony Romo. He's obviously been staying awake at meetings because his knowledge of the offense and decision-making in the pocket have been excellent. He's very capable of turning a broken play into a positive one, and it's nice to not have a virtual statue in the pocket holding the entire offense hostage.

I wonder if the stomach-puncher at Washington is going to keep them out of the playoffs, though maybe they deserve it after Bill Parcells played his hand wrong. At the pro level you should never go for two until the game situation mandates it - normally that's somewhere in the fourth period. Looking at that card in the first half is insane, but most coaches seem to know the deal. Jim Haslett is the only other pro coach I can remember botching this, though maybe Mad Mike did back in his St. Louis days. It sounds like something he would do, doesn't it? (Someday the NFL Network will merge with the Game Show Network and we'll have a lot of laughs. You know Martz would split Kings. You know Haslett would forget to look at the used letter board.)

We never really got along to Chicago in this table, which is probably fair because they got plenty of lip service in the first two months. But what do we make of their mess against Miami? Can Rex Grossman get his confidence back? I see a bunch of potential landmines for this Chicago offense if the Bears have to face two of the wrong matchups in January (if they catch a pair out of the Cowboys, Panthers, Eagles and Giants, they're getting beat.)

At least they're getting New York at the right time this week - so many key Giants are hurt, especially the hell-raising bookends on the defensive line. I'm not buying long-term stock in the Bears at the moment, but they'll squeak this one out; Eli Manning hasn't looked right in a month and now he's running out of healthy targets. I'll take Oedipus Rex, you grab the check.

From: Michael Salfino <salfino@comcast.net>
Date: November 9, 2006 9:08:05 AM EST
To: scott pianowski <spianow@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: once in a lifetime

Well, I don't want to feel too sorry for Manning. He has all those commercials. If he doesn't have a universe of praise, he certainly has a very large solar system's worth. The people who bash Manning now are the same people who talk about smash mouth football. They are the people who want to self identify as "smarter than the rest;" this is their bizarre way of labeling themselves some kind of elitist, football purist. But they're spending too much time styling and not enough on the substance of the matter. The facts are all around us, people. They're easy to access in this era of Google and DirecTV.

As for the Colts, this team has four quality wins already and three on the road. In 2005 at this time, they had one quality win, at New England which was in Week 9. In 2004, they had one, at Jacksonville (through this point of the season).

When the Chargers pass a real test (which, as you agree, they haven't yet), get back to me. And I don't think at Cincy is a real test the way the Bengals are playing (on pace for allowing 46 sacks). That 2005 win at Indy will mean nothing come January. New QB, for one. Plus, the playing field will be equal. Last year, the Chargers were playing for their lives; the Colts had basically clinched everything. The Patriots play a 3-4 and can rush the passer. Manning clearly has figured that out. You either have to forgo the shotgun or that Pop 2 blocking scheme (where the guards block the outside blitzers) in favor of a fan blocking scheme (where linemen block the closest blitzer). It's not complicated. And it's why Peyton was so pissed about his "protection schemes" after last year's playoff loss to the Steelers.

I agree this Ravens defense is a step or two below the 2000 version, but it makes explosive plays out of that 46 scheme, you have to give them that. Of course, they give up their fair share of big plays, too. Again, I think this is borderline playoff team handicapped by a bad offense and over-the-hill QB and RB, but one that will give an inexperienced or mistake-prone QB fits.

The lesson with the Jaguars is this: if you have two QBs who can't throw consistently, go with the one who also can run.

The Bears will be fine for the playoffs because they'll have Bernard Berrian back. For now, though, they might be in more than a little trouble without Berrian's speed keeping the safeties deep and occupying their attention.

The Eagles cannot beat the Bears because that defense will grind up any one-dimensional offense. Did you know the Eagles are 18th in three-and-out drives? That's not the sign of a dominating defense. They go three and out well more than twice as frequently as the Colts (just 9 out of 79 drives).

Giants-Bears. I can't make a prediction here because I just don't know how the Bears offense will adjust. I do agree with you that Eli Manning has not played well for about a month. It's hard to see a bounce back against Chicago. But I'm looking forward to that one. We also didn't talk about Jets-Pats, but the Jets killed the buzz by getting spanked in Cleveland. But that's a subject for another day. We should not have to pay for this gruel. When the sausage is dry and the flapjacks greasy, you know some gastrointestinal distress awaits. Next time, it's dry toast and orange juice for me.