DID FIELD-GOAL DECISIONS AND FIELD-GOAL KICKERS DECIDE THE SUPER BOWL?

                                                                                      Kallas Remarks by Steve Kallas

Lost in the shuffle of the Tracy Porter interception return of a Peyton Manning pass late in the game to clinch the Super Bowl was the role of the field goal kickers, who they are, how they were there and an ill-fated decision to kick one by Colts coach Jim Caldwell.

WHY MATT STOVER?

The Colts decided to go with Matt Stover over the greatest postseason field goal kicker ever, Adam Vinatieri. Arguably not a tough decision since Vinatieri had had knee surgery in October, unless you were thinking about Stover kicking a 51-yarder, outside his range. Leading up to the Super Bowl, Vinatieri was quoted as saying “I’m in the bullpen right now, getting healthier every day. I could probably go if needed.”

Obviously, Jim Caldwell felt he wasn’t needed.

Matt Stover made Caldwell look good, kicking a 38-yarder early in the game to put the Colts on the board. But, as luck (fate? destiny?) would have it, Caldwell had to make a decision in the fourth quarter – whether to let Stover kick a field goal that very few, other than Caldwell, thought he could make.

So Stover tried to kick a 51-yarder with 10:44 left in the game. With the Colts up 17-16 at the time, it would force the Saints to score a touchdown if the kick was good. Of course, the kick wasn’t good, and the rest is history.

The Saints got great field position at their own 41 and proceeded to go on a nine-play, 59-yard, win-the-Super-Bowl drive.

What would have happened if Adam Vinatieri had been active for the game? Well, of course, we’ll never know. But with two Super Bowl-winning kicks on his resume and with arguably the greatest clutch field goal kick in NFL history (in the snow against the Raiders in the 2002 playoffs), most would rather have had Adam Vinatieri in that spot.

MEET THE NEW ADAM VINATIERI – GARRETT HARTLEY

A little too early for that? Well, maybe, but you can’t be more clutch than Hartley was in the last two games for the Saints. Hartley hit it right down the middle against the Vikings in OT, a 40-yarder that put the Saints into the Super Bowl. He then went out and kicked a 46-yarder and a 44-yarder in the first half of the Super Bowl to keep the Saints close. He then kicked a 47-yarder to give the Saints life, becoming the first kicker in a Super Bowl to kick three field goals over 40 yards in one Super Bowl.

All the field goals, including the OT one against the Vikings, were no-doubt-abouters, straight down the middle and good when kicked. In a postseason where field goal kickers, as a group, were a total disaster, Garrett Hartley, 5-5, stood far above the rest.

Hartley had his own strange trip to Super Bowl hero. As a rookie kicker in 2008 out of Oklahoma, Hartley made an immediate impression, going 13-13 in field goals. But over the summer, he tested positive for a banned stimulant (he said that he took Adderall to stay awake on a long drive) and was suspended for the first four games of this season.

The Saints intelligently signed dependable John Carney, but Hartley regained his job in December and went 9-11 in field goals the rest of the regular season. They also brilliantly signed Carney as a kicking consultant (after releasing him) to specifically work with Hartley. Obviously it helped, as Hartley’s 5-5 in the playoffs now makes him 27-29 in his NFL career, a staggering 93.1% accuracy rate.

SO, TO RECAP

Most people at the time thought it was a mistake to let Matt Stover try to kick a 51-yarder in the fourth quarter of the Super Bowl. Whether it was a mistake to not have Adam Vinatieri on the active roster is a question that can’t really be answered. But the combination of kicker selection and play selection (that is, to actually try that field goal) contributed mightily to the Colts’ defeat.

Conversely, to show great confidence in a promising, second-year kicker and to retain a great veteran as a teacher led to not only a game-winning kick to get the Saints to the Super Bowl, but also to three over-40 yard field goals in the Super Bowl. Brilliant decision-making all around by the New Orleans Saints.

OTHER SUPER BOWL THOUGHTS

1. Give Dwight Freeney a lot of credit: Double-teamed the first quarter, the Saints must have thought they could single-team him in the second quarter. He got good pressure and then a big sack to stop a Saints drive in the second quarter. But he was ineffective in the second half (that long halftime must have hurt him) and, eventually, came out of the game for long stretches.
2. Peyton Manning is taking a beating as his quest for immortality came up short. The problem for Manning is that he’s considered the greatest quarterback ever – in the regular season. With only one Super Bowl, he’s still an all-time great but his record in the playoffs is 9-9. He totally lost his focus at the end, foolishly calling a timeout and then trying (without success) to wave it off.
3. Sean Payton has come a long way since inexplicably being relieved of his play-calling duties as offensive coordinator by none other than Jim Fassel (then of the Giants) in 2002. It’s a message for all young coaches at every level – if you are confident in yourself, stay the course. The people in charge are wrong more often than you think. Payton was saved by Bill Parcells in Dallas and, in 2006, New Orleans took a chance on him. The rest, as they say, is history.
4. You would think that more defensive backs would jump routes like Tracy Porter did when there is an all-out blitz on. Porter took a bit of a gamble, but it’s hard to expect even the great Peyton Manning to throw a deep ball under that kind of pressure. Porter jumped the route – and clinched the Super Bowl at a time when virtually everybody thought there would be overtime.
5. The first-half Super Bowl commercials were, as a group, very bad. It’s amazing that people get paid a gazillion dollars to think of these things and then corporations pay a gazillion dollars to put them on the air. The Leno-Oprah-Letterman spot was more weird than funny. Brett Favre thinking about retirement at 50 isn’t funny because Brett Favre thinking about retirement at 38, 39 and 40 isn’t funny. In fact, it’s boring. Any entity that paid a fortune to air a commercial in the second half should request a refund, because viewers like this writer and many others just blew off the commercials in the second half as you would during a regular season game.
6. Jeremy Shockey, whatever you think of him, is an excellent football player who finally got his ring. So, too, Jonathan Vilma, a very talented guy who didn’t fit in with Eric Mangini and the Jets defense. Who’s laughing now?
7. While the Saints wanted to be “aggressive,” they actually started the game very non-aggressive. Their first play from scrimmage was a handoff to the up back for two yards. Three and out. Conversely, Peyton Manning’s first play from scrimmage was a play-action pass to Dallas Clark for 18 yards. Indeed, the big fourth down “gamble” by the Saints late in the first half turned out to be an aggressive attempt with a passive run play. After failing going over the right side on third down, why not go play action pass down there rather then run right again? It all became irrelevant when Sean Payton called that onside kick for the ages to start the third quarter. Fortunately for him, the Saints recovered and that play changed the game.

FINALLY, DOES THE RUN SET UP THE PASS OR DOES THE PASS SET UP THE RUN?

Here’s the biggest change in the NFL in the last decade or so. Once upon a time, it was the gospel that a team had to “establish the run” to set up the pass. While that is still true sometimes today (see the Jets two playoff wins), there are also situations where the pass sets up the run. The Colts had some very good success running the ball after Peyton Manning had success throwing it early in the game. The Patriots sometimes try and establish the run, but they also (especially in 2007) often pass first and run later. The Chargers are another team that will pass at times and then kill you with the run.

The point is that it can work either way now and that really was untrue in the past and distant past in the NFL It is more a quarterbacks’ league now than ever before and, unless there are changes in the rules (which there won’t be) to help the defenses, the offensive passing numbers will continue to rise.

© Copyright 2010 by Steve Kallas.  All rights reserved.

NO MATSUI + NO DAMON = MISTAKE; THE ONLY QUESTION IS HOW BIG?

                                                                                        Kallas Remarks by Steve Kallas

It’s hard to believe that the Yankees let World Series MVP and (arguably more important) lethal against lefties lefty hitter Hideki Matsui go sign with the Angels for the piddling sum of $6.5 million. It’s also hard to believe that the Yankees didn’t sign Johnny Damon in what sure seemed like a spitting contest between Scott Boras and the Yankee organization (you bet Johnnie Damon should have stepped in and done something (see Rodriguez, Alex)).

But the Yankees hurt themselves whether anybody understands it now or not. The problem is, we won’t know the severity of the injury probably until a big spot in the playoffs.

THE YANKEES ARE LOADED, BUT …

Here’s the problem: the Yankees are still the Yankees of Jeter and A-Rod and Mark Teixeira. They are still the Yankees of that great pitching staff that’s added Javier Vazquez, the statisticians’ (but not the voters’) pick for NL Cy Young. But there is potential trouble brewing in Yankeeland which may come back to bite them in a big spot in the playoffs.

Matsui and Damon are two of the best lefties in baseball against left-handed pitching. It’s hard to explain what that can do to the manager in the opposite dugout in a big spot in a big game. Maybe the best example is Game 6 of the 2009 World Series. Matsui had crushed Pedro Martinez his first two times up with a two-run homer and a two-run single.  By the time he came up again, Pedro was on the ropes, the Phillies were trailing, the World Series was about to slip away. Phillies manager Charlie Manuel, knowing full well that Matsui had hammered Pedro his first two times up, played it “by the book.” He brought in lefty J.A. Happ and, reportedly with players in the Yankee dugout chuckling that they brought in a lefty, Matsui promptly doubled in two more runs. Ballgame over, World Series over, the Yankees return to the mountaintop.

Manuel was damned if he did and damned if he didn’t. And the Yankees knew it. He did what everybody does – bring in the lefty to face a lefty. And paid the price.

How the Yankees could let that sense of security escape for only $6.5 million is an utter mystery.

BUT THE YANKEES WANT TO USE THE DH FOR OTHER PLAYERS

So what? As stated here before (see Kallas Remarks, 9/29/09 and 11/5/09), the Yankees EASILY could have kept Matsui and solved their problems. All he had to do was DH in about 90 games, pinch hit in 40 more (that’s as many at-bats as last year) and maybe, just maybe, play the outfield once in a while (but even that wouldn’t be necessary if he couldn’t). Then you would still have 72 games to DH Jeter a few times or A-Rod a few times or Teixeira a few times or Posada 35-40 times (he still wants to catch all the time) or whatever – it could have been done.

BUT THE YANKEES WANT TO GET YOUNGER

Well they have – kind of. Forget that Randy Winn will be 36 in June or that Nick Johnson will be 32 in September and is prone to injury. Curtis Granderson, apparently the answer to a lot of Yankee problems, will only be 29 next month. So the Yankees are younger but at the expense of the number two and five hitters in their line-up, at the expense of two of the best hitting, lefties against lefties and excellent hitters in general and two of the clutchest hitters who have done it on the biggest stage (the postseason) in the biggest city.

Is “getting younger” really worth it?

LET’S LOOK AT THE NUMBERS

Well, that’s a problem. The Yankees, no matter what you read, will lose a lot offensively. Yes, they will be better defensively, but enough to offset what they lost? Not a chance.

Johnny Damon, a .283 lifetime hitter against lefties with a .346 on-base percentage, was still good against lefties in 2009 as a .269 hitter against lefties with a .332 OBP. He hit almost as many homeruns (percentage wise) against lefties (7 in 171 at-bats, .41) as he did against righties (17 in 379 at-bats, .44). Don’t discount that (because they lost Matsui as well). And when we get to how good Nick Johnson is against lefties (and he is), remember, Johnny Damon can still run and Nick Johnson still can’t run.

But the HUGE loss is Matsui. Forget the World Series for now. During the 2009 regular season, Hideki Matsui hit a home run against lefties every TEN at-bats (13 home runs in 131 at-bats). That’s stunning stuff. He was actually better against lefties (.282 average, .358 OBP, .618 slugging and .976 OPS) than righties (.271 average, .379 OBP, .465 slugging and .835 OPS). Guys like this just aren’t available. And they are not named Curtis Granderson, Nick Johnson or Randy Winn.

While Nick Johnson is excellent against lefties (he’s more of a replacement offensively for Damon even though, inexplicably, the Yankees apparently want him to be almost a full-time DH) and an excellent on-base guy (.316 average, .440 OBP in 2009), Curtis Granderson has his issues against lefties (in 2009 a .183 average, .245 OBP, .239 slugging, .484 OPS). That’s not going to cut it.

And the right-handed hitting Winn was also putrid against lefties in 2009 (.158 average, .184 OBP, .200 slugging, .384 OPS). Frankly, that’s not very good at all.

See the problem yet?

BUT WAIT, IT GETS WORSE

Now we have to talk about the most important part for the Yankees – the postseason. Hideki Matsui and Johnny Damon are seasoned, fantastic, experienced postseason players. Matsui had a World Series for the ages — .615 average, three homers, eight RBIs, MVP and on and on. Johnny Damon, after not hitting against Minnesota, went .300 average, .323 OBP, .533 slugging and .856 OPS against the Angels. He then went .364 average, .440 OBP, .455 slugging and .895 OPS in the World Series.

The “replacements” in the postseason? Well, not so good. Nick Johnson, as a young Yankee in 2002 and 2003, went .209 average, .303 OBP, .299 slugging, .602 OPS. He hasn’t been back since 2003. Curtis Granderson was very good for the Tigers early on in 2006, his only postseason. But he had a woeful World Series (2-21) so his postseason numbers are .226 average, .288 OBP, .491 slugging, .779 OPS.

Randy Winn? Well, most of you know that Randy Winn has never been in the postseason.

Uh-oh.

SO, THAT’S THE REAL PROBLEM

The combination of little or no postseason experience and little or no postseason success bodes poorly for the Yankees. They will be prone to having problems with lefties in the postseason and even the regular season. While it won’t matter as much in the regular season (they should be good enough to win), it could kill them in the playoffs. Which leads us to …

THE PLAXICO ANALOGY

The what? The Plaxico Burress analogy. Most Giant fans were happy when the Giants sent Plaxico packing after Plaxico went to a nightclub in NYC packing heat. He shot himself, and the rest is mystery. Still in jail now, the Giants really haven’t been the same without him. They tried to replace him. In fact, their wide receivers did pretty well this season. But they still have nobody to do what Plaxico did – catch that fade in the corner of the end zone, catch that jump ball when you needed it most, bail out Eli Manning when he was in trouble and kind of threw it up for grabs. It hurt the Giants a lot in their playoff loss to the Eagles two seasons ago (see Kallas Remarks, 1/13/09). And, of course, the Giants didn’t even make the playoffs this season.

The Giants still haven’t really replaced Plaxico Brress. And it still might hurt them in a big spot next year in the playoffs – if they make them.

SO TOO, POSSIBLY, WITH THE YANKEES IN THE POSTSEASON

You don’t have to be Karnak the Magnificent (where have you gone, Johnny Carson?, late-night TV — or at least NBC – turns its lonely eyes to you)) to see a similar situation for the Yankees in a big playoff game. The game’s on the line – a big at-bat early or late in a playoff game. Curtis Granderson is coming up to the plate. The opposing manager doesn’t think twice – there’s no Hideki Matsui or even Johnny Damon up – in comes the lefty. The Yankees have to pinch hit or swallow hard with Granderson.

That’s potentially a big problem.

CAN THE YANKEES WIN IT ALL IN 2010?

Of course they can, they’re the YANKEES. But don’t downplay the loss of both Damon and Matsui (we’ll mention Melky Cabrera here as well because he swung a magic bat last year with three game-winning hits early on and a few other eighth-inning go ahead hits – none of these new guys will do what Melky did. Having said that, the Yankees did get a very good pitcher for Cabrera so it’s hard to argue with that).

But there might come a time in the postseason when the Yankees regret losing both of these clutch winners. Their replacements just aren’t as good.

© Copyright 2010 by Steve Kallas.  All rights reserved.

KELLY KULICK BEATS THE MEN, WINS A BOWLING MAJOR TOURNAMENT AND SHOCKS THE WORLD

                                                                                        Kallas Remarks by Steve Kallas

It was a stunning win for 32-year-old Kelly Kulick at Red Rock Lanes in Las Vegas this past Sunday as she beat two former PBA Players of the Year to win the 2010 Tournament of Champions. As with tennis and golf, bowling has four majors a year with the Tournament of Champions being one of them. Kulick became the first woman in the history of the Professional Bowlers Association to win a PBA tournament (and, of course, the first female to win a PBA major as well).

CLIMBING OUT OF A HOLE

Things didn’t look great for Kulick in the final eight-game block on Friday as she started it in sixth place (only the top four make the TV final). After poor games of 174 and 172, she seemed out of the running. But in her final six games, she went 223, 279, 277, 222, 236 and 267 to finish second and make the show.

KULICK V. KOIVUNIEMI

The ESPN televison show (with over 1.7 million viewers) began with Mika Koivuniemi defeating Rhino Page 255-215, with the winner then facing Kelly Kulick for the right to bowl Chris Barnes in the final.

Mika, as he is known, has eight career PBA titles (including two majors) and was the PBA Player of the Year in 2003-04. More importantly for his match against Kulick, Mika had thrown the last seven strikes in match one to shoot 255 and seemed lined up to beat Kelly Kulick. But a funny thing happened on the way to an all-male final.

Koivuniemi went high in the first frame and left a four pin which he made but then went high in the second frame and missed the 3-10 “baby” split. That was really the only opening that Kelly Kulick needed, as she was clean through the first five frames (leading by four pins) and then got locked in and would finish with six strikes in her last seven balls. Mika threw a 4-6 split in the sixth and could never get back as Kulick shut him out with a four bagger in the ninth and tenth to win 237-233. At no point in the match did Kulick surrender the lead.

THE CHAMPIONSHIP MATCH FOR THE AGES

Kelly Kulick against top seed Chris Barnes figured to be a close match. Arguably the most talented bowler alive, Barnes has had his troubles as the number one seed in “stepladder” (three plays four, the winner plays two, the winner plays one for the title) finals. Despite 12 titles including two majors (he won the Tournament of Champions in 2006), Chris Barnes’ record as the number one seed in stepladder finals was 2-6 (and 1-2 in majors).

Interestingly, Barnes decided to let Kulick bowl first. She threw a solid strike and when Barnes seemed surprised when his first ball went light for only an eight count, Barnes looked amazed and uttered “Wow” because of his poor ball reaction.

Commentator Randy Pedersen thought right away that this was a problem for Barnes. He said, after that first ball, that there was a “lot of indecision going on in the head of Chris Barnes right at this moment.”

Barnes made the spare and then Pedersen said, ‘And there’s been so many times when Chris has struggled on television, he’s struggled in title matches. Who can forget the 2008 Tournament of Champions when he had a 50-pin lead against Michael Haugen, Jr. only to miss a ten pin late and lose by a pin.

Just then, Barnes buried a strike in the second and Pedersen, maybe hedging his bets, said, “But there’s also been times when he’s been very, very good.”

KULICK GOES TO WORK

None of this fazed Kelly Kulick in the least. After the match she would tell Pedersen that she “was bowling the pins, not Chris.” It certainly looked like it as she buried strikes in the second and third frames. When Barnes went spare and then through the nose for a 4-6-10, it looked like the route was on.

And it was.

Kulick got a break in the fourth as she came in a little high but tripped the four pin for her fourth consecutive strike. She threw what looked like a pretty good ball in the fifth, only to leave a pocket 7-10 split. Nevertheless, she raised her lead from 10 pins in the first, to 20 in the second to 31 in the third and to 41 after just four frames.

When Chris Barnes threw a strike in the fifth and left a ringing 10-pin in the sixth which he made, he cut the lead to 30.

But that’s the closest he would ever get.

KELLY KULICK PUTS DOWN THE HAMMER

Showing great mental toughness after leaving a pocket 7-10 in the fifth, Kulick stepped up and threw two strikes on her way to six in a row and a 265-195 defeat of the 2007-08 PBA Bowler of the Year, Chris Barnes.

It was both stunning and historic at the same time.

Kulick, an All-American bowler at Morehead State, a three-time Majors winner on the Women’s tour and a four-time Team USA member, had just become the first woman ever to win a PBA title. Barnes was gracious in defeat as he congratulated Kelly Kulick right after the match by telling her, “Great bowling, Kelly. Great job all week. You handled it fantastically.”

Needless to say, Kelly Kulick was overjoyed with her victory. Before her final shot in her winning match, she said, “History has been made in the world of sports.”

And she’s 100% right.

While Kulick was the first woman to win an exemption to bowl on the men’s tour in 2006-07, she never got the acclaim that a Michelle Wie got in golf or that a Danica Patrick got in racing. Non-bowlers might understand what she did if they could envision Wie winning the Masters or Patrick winning the Daytona 500. It’s a staggering accomplishment.

AFTER THE WIN

Kelly Kulick, a classy woman, took the beautiful Tournament of Champions trophy and handed it to her mother, telling her that “this is for you” and “I love you.” She then told Randy Pedersen that she thought she had the match won “after the 7-10 split, when I came back and doubled right away. That put me right back in my confident level.” Kulick also said that “this day will never be forgotten. It is by far the greatest accomplishment ever in my career.”

Kulick, who is also a fantastic teacher of the sport as a lead instructor at (and a graduate of) the famous Dick Ritger Bowling Camps, thanked a lot of people right after the match, including Chad Murphy of Columbia, Ed Gallagher of Ebonite, as well as the PBA, the USBC and the wonderful fans.

At the very end, Kulick looked at the camera and said “Ebonite, Mission accomplished,”

apparently a reference to the new Ebonite ball she threw to win the Tournament of Champions, “The Mission.” This ball will be available to the masses on February 4.

RANDY PEDERSEN SUMS IT UP BEST

Pedersen, the ESPN commentator who has been around for decades and is in the Top 50 Bowlers of All-Time, probably summed it up best by telling Kelly Kulick, in front of a national TV audience, that “that may have been the best performance I’ve ever seen given the circumstances.”

Amen to that.

Kelly Kulick has boldly gone where no woman has gone before. With a two-year PBA exemption and a $40,000 winner’s check (which apparently she’ll use for a down payment on a house), the sky’s the limit. With appearances already on The CBS Early Show and ESPN, she now becomes, more than ever, a spokesperson for her sport and a great role model to all women and girls in all sports.

© Copyright 2009 by Steve Kallas.  All rights reserved.

REX RYAN BRINGS OLD-TIME FOOTBALL BACK TO THE NFL

                                                                                           Kallas Remarks by Steve Kallas

Over the last decade or so, the game of football has drastically changed. Once upon a time, it was establish the run to set up the pass. Over the last five to ten years, however, rule changes helping the offense, changes in offensive philosophy, the emergence of superstar quarterbacks (Peyton Manning and Tom Brady, to name just two), empty backfields, five-wides, etc. have made some offenses pass first, run later scoring machines.

THE REX RYAN TIME MACHINE

Now here comes Rex Ryan, son of defensive genius Buddy Ryan (creator of the mid-80s Bears stunning 46-defense). Rex was the defensive coordinator of the Baltimore Ravens before he got his head coaching chance with the Jets and the Ravens were an intelligent, maniacal defense for many years.

Rex Ryan brought that intensity to New York and focused on defense and running the football – the way it was done, with rare exception, for pretty much all of the 20th Century. The fact that he had a rookie quarterback, Mark Sanchez, with only one season as a starter in college probably made his decision easier – after a decent start, Sanchez became a turnover machine who had to be scaled way back for the Jets to make their run to the AFC Championship Game.

Suddenly, it’s the run setting up easy and productive passes for Mark Sanchez against the Bengals in the first round of the playoffs. His 12-15 was helped greatly by offensive coordinator Brian Schottenheimer’s play calling – there were very few difficult throws for Sanchez to make.

ROOKIE COACH, ROOKIE QB, ROOKIE RUNNING BACK?

Nobody saw the emergence of a star coming in running back Shone Greene, a rookie from Iowa, in these playoffs. He had a solid rookie year (108 carries for 540 yards and two TDs) as a back-up. While Thomas Jones had a superb year (1402 rushing yards, 14 rushing TDs), he’s been bothered lately by a sore knee.

Greene simply stepped in and starred, rushing for 135 yards and a TD against the Bengals and 128 yards and that game-breaking 53-yard TD in the fourth quarter against the stunned Chargers.

With an excellent offensive line (Future Hall-of Famer Faneca, Mangold and Ferguson are all going to the Pro Bowl), the Jets now see that they can run it with Thomas Jones or Shone Greene (and, don’t forget, they’ve done all of this without Leon Washington).

Yes, they were very lucky to make the playoffs (see Kallas Remarks, 1/9/10). But under the old axiom “anything can happen once you’re in,” the Jets have taken full advantage of their opportunity. It is borderline miraculous what they’ve done. With defensive excellence against both the Bengals and the high-powered Chargers, the Jets are a team to be reckoned with now and in the future.

DOES A LOT DEPEND ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF THEIR QB?

Well, of course it does. Sanchez has a way to go and the Jets have done a good job protecting him both with their offensive schemes and their offensive line. But the Jets can win a lot of games and make a lot of noise with this defense and running game. The only reason Darrelle Revis wasn’t the NFL Defensive Player of the Year is probably because hardly anyone knew who he was the first half of the season. If he had a “name” or a “rep,” he would have been the hands-down winner. Over on the other side, Lito Sheppard has shown quiet but important leadership and has had a heckuva year himself.

And with blitz packages galore, the Jets have fooled many a quarterback and had back-to-back picks against Philip Rivers in the biggest (to date) of games.

Don’t forget that, defensively, they’ve done all of this without Kris Jenkins, a monster in the middle.

The Jets hope that Mark Sanchez will mature quickly. But, even if he doesn’t, it says here that the Jets can be a Ravens-like team for years to come. Sanchez will wind up better than Trent Dilfer (and, hopefully, much more) and you Jet (and Giant) fans know that Dilfer is a Super Bowl-winning QB.

BUT IT ALL GOES BACK TO REX

While he can act like a buffoon at times, Rex Ryan has changed the culture and the mindset of the Jets after just one season. With additional, intelligent drafting, the Jets can become a force to be reckoned with quicker than most thought. Can they beat the Patriots next year in the AFC East? A fascinating question since nobody knows how badly Tom Brady was hurt this season (or how Wes Welker will come back or what the Pats will do about that defense). While it says here that beating the Pats will still be a tall order, in the NFL they have that thing called a wild card.

But just the fact that it’s at least a discussion as to who’s better, the Jets or the Pats, shows how far Rex Ryan has brought his team in one season.

Rex Ryan isn’t the Coach of the Year, but just the fact that his name has to be mentioned in the conversation shows you how far the Jets have come.

The future is now for the New York Jets. Amazing.

© Copyright 2009 by Steve Kallas.  All rights reserved.

WHO DO YOU BELIEVE: MARK MCGWIRE, TONY LA RUSSA OR JOSE CANSECO?

                                  Kallas Remarks by Steve Kallas

It’s hard to believe, but is there anyone in baseball who has more credibility in this whole steroids debacle than Jose Canseco? Mark McGwire, with the help of Ari Fleischer and his publicity group (according to some reports), decided to finally admit what virtually everbody believed: that he used steroids during his major league career. Of course, McGwire HAD to do something before he shows up in a few weeks to be the Cardinals hitting coach. Showing up with Bob Costas of MLB Network for an interview, perhaps McGwire and his group actually believed they could give what amounts to a partial apology (essentially, I used steroids but I don’t think it helped me hit home runs) and end the media fascination with his home run totals.

Of course, they were totally wrong.

After losing his composure and crying with Costas, McGwire appeared the next day with Bob Ley on ESPN and seemed like a different person. He had what looked like a forced smile (bizarre) as he went over much of the same stuff with Ley but, not surprisingly, people are focusing on his belief (and, hey, maybe he really does believe it) that steroids did not help him hit homers.

Nobody except his staunchest supporters gives his statements much believability.

Interestingly, within a day of McGwire talking about his “strong mind” and how that was one of the key components in hitting so many home runs, Tony La Russa went on Baseball Tonight via phone and essentially said the same thing, stating how tough McGwire was mentally, how he worked so hard and how, at both Oakland and St. Louis, La Russa had run a “legitimate” program (he sounded more like an NCAA basketball coach under investigation).

IS THERE NO MANAGER WHO KNEW?

La Russa said that, until McGwire called him this past Monday and told him, he (La Russa) had no idea that Mark McGwire had ever taken steroids.

Is that believable?

But all La Russa was doing was taking a page from the late 20th/early 21st century manager’s book; that is, I didn’t know anything at any time until everybody else did. Joe Torre has already used this in his capacity as both Yankees manager and Dodgers manager.

But what would you expect? Do you expect a Hall of Fame candidate manager to admit anything other than a vague “well, some guys did look bigger?”

That’s not realistic.

WHAT DOES JOSE CANSECO SAY?

Here’s a quote from Jose Canseco’s book, Juiced, talking about Mark McGwire and his Oakland A’s teammate, Jason Giambi:

As soon as I rejoined the team for the 1997 season, I was amazed to see how open and casual these two [Giambi and McGwire] were about steroids. Sometimes, the three of us would go into the bathrooms stalls together to shoot up steroids or growth hormone. I would inject myself, and Giambi and McGwire would be one stall over, injecting each other. Other times, I preferred to inject myself at home, but those two always did it at the ballpark, because it was easier that way and they knew they had nothing to worry about. Plus, they were having all kinds of fun injecting.

The three of us talked about steroids all the time that year, right in front of everybody.

By 1997, in front of everyone but the media, it was completely accepted that we would talk openly about steroids.

Juiced, pp. 169-70 (2005), copyrighted by Jose Canseco.

Here’s another quote from the book about what steroids do for your confidence;

The psychological effect of steroids is very dramatic. Using steroids properly can do wonders for your confidence. You look good. You’re big and strong. McGwire was a twitching mass of muscle, and he had great technique. If that combination doesn’t make you feel confident, I don’t know what will.

The mind is a very powerful thing; if you convince yourself that you’re a great player, and you have the basic ability, you’re going to be a great player. You can have the perfect body for baseball and perfect ability, but if your brain is telling you “You have no chance!” you’re not going to be successful. For Mark, steroids help send his confidence level sky-high.

Juiced, pp. 75-6 (2005), copyrighted by Jose Canseco.

When asked by Bob Ley earlier this week about Jose Canseco’s accusations that they had injected each other at Oakland, etc., McGwire said that “he won’t stoop” to Canseco’s level. What does that mean? Canseco had a good response, essentially saying that McGwire can’t stoop to his level because he [Canseco] is where McGwire can’t go – the truth.

Ouch!!

It was also bizarre that McGwire told Bob Costas that he didn’t want to be “Lou Ferrigno or Arnold Schwarzenegger.” But that’s exactly who he looked like.

Just take a look at the before and after pictures. It’s scary.

WHERE’S BUD SELIG IN ALL OF THIS?

Bud Selig took this opportunity to, essentially, welcome McGwire back into the fold and also to state that the steroids era is over.

Who believes that?

The reality is there is still no test for human growth hormone and, for all we know, there are other things that players can use that can’t be detected by the present testing. We’ve seen this in cycling, in the Olympics, in track and field, etc. – the bad guys are usually ahead of the good guys.

WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE?

Well, Mark McGwire had to do something after, essentially, disappearing for five years (and while this writer is one lawyer who agrees that, while he shouldn’t have incriminated himself before Congress during that debacle of an appearance, he should have spoken up after the statute of limitations had run, about four years ago), he simply wasn’t prepared to say what most want to hear: I did it, I’m sorry and yes, it helped me hit homers.

By denying the last thing mentioned above (essentially, my strong mind helped me, not the steroids), McGwire made himself fodder for jokes. He could have done a much better job but, at least, he finally admitted the truth: that he did steroids. This won’t end the story: he will probably be the butt of a lot of jokes at a lot of ball parks this season.

Another great stain on baseball.

© Copyright 2009 by Steve Kallas.  All rights reserved.