THE GREATEST QUARTER OF FOOTBALL I'VE EVER SEEN

Wow.

Congrats to Eli. Oh, and the Giants, too.

NFL FOOTBALL '07: CONFERENCE CHAMPIONSHIPS

Yes, I was tempted to pick the Giants last week. Had I been picking with point spreads and not straight-up, I probably would have pulled the trigger.

Them's the breaks.

I mean no disrespect to the Giants, but it sure looked like the Cowboys spent too much time enjoying their 13-3 season and not enough time trying to get better and get ready for the divisional round.

I'm fine with that. I don't like the Cowboys, and I don't mind the Packers getting to play at home.

In the AFC, more arguments were made against resting players for regular-season games when you already have a bye week. Don't worry. It won't stop teams from doing it in the future.

It's simply our job to keep that stuff in mind when we're picking games. Feel free to remind me of this in the future.

New York Giants at Green Bay
The Giants deserve to be here, but let's deal with some facts (and opinions that can be taken as fact), here.

• The Giants were outgained by ~100 yards in the game against Dallas.
  
• In the first round, the Giants beat a mediocre Tampa Bay team that basically threw their last two regular-season games. New York was sharper because they had just gone toe-to-toe with New England.
• Green Bay played better (especially the last 56 minutes of the game) last week against Seattle than the Giants are probably capable of playing. It doesn't mean the Giants are toast in this game, because there's no guarantee the Packers will play that well again. But it's not a good sign, especially if you're thinking of taking the points.
• Eli Manning has talked about not liking the cold weather. Forecast gametime temperature: -2. Fahrenheit.
• The Giants secondary is decimated. The Packers, as long as there isn't a freak blizzard, will not be afraid to line up with five wideouts and exploit this.
• Green Bay's defense has more balance than Dallas or Tampa Bay.

The big one is this: The Giants don't win that game without a slew of mistakes by Dallas.

Yes, you have to give the Giants credit for competing and staying in the game long enough for Dallas to blow it, but can we count on Green Bay doing the same thing? The Packers already learned their lesson, when they coughed up a shot at home field in that horrible loss at Chicago. They won't screw this up again.

Green Bay is more talented, and they're at home. Take the Packers.
The pick: Green Bay

San Diego at New England
No way I figured Norv Turner's staff would out-coach Tony Dungy's last week. The Chargers adjusted and did the right things in the second half to at least keep Peyton Manning's offense from getting the ball into the end zone. And inexplicably, the Colts never really tried to establish the run in the second half.

This worries me more than anything else entering this week. While Indianapolis wasn't smart enough to really even try to expose an apparent hole in San Diego's defense (presumably because it didn't fit their game plan), we all know New England won't make the same mistake. If the Chargers' run defense can be exposed, the Patriots will expose it.

New England's coaches are prepared for everything. They'll adjust on the fly better than anyone.

And Norv Turner is on the other sideline.

Really, can you pick the Chargers to win this game? Why? What has Norv Turner done to make you think he can out-coach Bill Belichick in a close game? And what have the Chargers done to make you think they can win comfortably?

If it's Turner versus Belichick in the fourth quarter of a nail-biter, Belichick wins.

If the Chargers win by double-digits and aren't seriously threatened in the fourth quarter, I'd be beyond stunned.

New England has Tom Brady. They have great players all over the field on offense. The Chargers aren't good enough to stop them, especially if Billy Volek's presence limits San Diego offensively. Even with a healthy and effective Philip Rivers, I probably couldn't pull the trigger on this one.

The odds of San Diego covering the 14-point spread are very high. The odds of them winning outright are virtually nil. But I guess that's why they play the games. Good luck, guys. you'll need it.
The pick: New England

RANDOMIZATION: 01/16/08

Disallowed goal revisited. I have received many a response via e-mail and otherwise to my post about the WCHA and their Friday controversy in Denver. I want to thank all those with whom I have corresponded, whether we agree about what has happened or not.

I have a couple of things I'd like to add to what I said before.

First off, someone brought up a valid point. While referee Randy Schmidt is ultimately to blame for much of what went wrong, there were two other officials working on the ice with him, along with a replay official. They have to share some of the blame, too, because they had a responsibility to communicate what they saw with Schmidt and didn't do that.

Secondly, WCHA commissioner Bruce McLeod has broken his "silence" on this topic, speaking to - among others - Todd Milewski of The Capital Times in Madison.

(The commish gets a bit of a pass for his previous silence on the matter, as he was in Nashville for important NCAA-related stuff.)

He said he looked into the possibility that there was a clock malfunction, and he said that Denver senior associate athletic director Ron Grahame did find a glitch in the TV system that adds 0.0 between 1.0 and 0.9.

That, however, wasn't the issue to the commissioner.

"The issue was simply in the instructions that Randy (Schmidt, the referee) gave to the operator of the replay equipment: run it down to zero and stop it," McLeod said. "And, to me, that was the wrong instruction. He should have gone further back. And he would have seen because what he saw definitely was that the puck was not in the net, but what he didn't see was the puck had crossed the line and come out. It was a human error."

I trust the commissioner when he says it was a human error. I also recognize that it was more than just one guy who messed up, though Schmidt bears the ultimate responsibility (and reading between the lines, it sounds like he is going to be pretty heavily disciplined or fired).

The WCHA has a bit of work to do to restore their reputation, and I'm sure that the officials will reminded of all the protocol for review situations. None of this will get Wisconsin their point back, but there's no fair way to do that. McLeod is right. Giving Wisconsin a point will cause St. Cloud State to look at what happened to them, as they were on the wrong side of Schmidt's other unfortunate mistake this season.

Schmidt has seen his share of controversy already this season, and the latest one might not be over yet.

I've been told by a reliable source that McLeod is planning on being in Duluth for at least one game of the UMD-Minnesota series this weekend. If I get a chance to sit down with him, I'll let you know about what is said.

How to win a road NFL game this weekend. For the Chargers and Giants, I have one tip that is more important than anything else.

Take the tape of your Week Two game (San Diego and the Giants were both bludgeoned by their title game opponents in Week Two) and set it on fire. Make it a public ceremony.

Don't watch it. And whatever you do, don't take anything that happened and act like you can learn from it for this week.

Both San Diego and New York are better than they were in Week Two, and that's a good start. But it's also worth noting that Green Bay and New England aren't the same, either. The Patriots aren't going to carbon-copy their Week Two game plan, because that's just not how Bill Belichick operates. They'll come up with some different wrinkles on each side of the ball, so if the Chargers are insistent on learning lessons from that 38-14 defeat, they're probably wasting their time. Outside of playing pure fundamental football (which they didn't play in the earlier meeting), there's nothing San Diego can learn to do.

The Giants lost 35-13 to Green Bay in Week Two. Back then, the Packers didn't even muster the threat of a running game, and Brett Favre was not good throwing the ball deep. The pass defense was shaky because of poor play at safety, and the Pack didn't look like a Super Bowl contender.

If New York shows up prepared to play the same Green Bay team they played in September, they'll get worked by as many (if not more) points.

RANDOMIZATION: 01/09/08

What did we miss? The two-week hiatus (was planned to be one, but you know how that goes) allowed us to miss a bunch of stuff here. The NFL playoffs started after New England finished a 16-0 regular season. The NHL played a hockey game outside, allowing cynical media members to get a bunch more ammunition to make fun of the league. The Timberwolves lost a bunch of games. Then they won one.

Oh, and a national television commentator suggested that a bunch of golfers lynch Tiger Woods. We'll start there.

Context matters. I don't know much about Kelly Tilghman. She seems like a rather nice-looking young lady, and she did quickly apologize for her stupid statement.

However, weren't we down this road in April? And didn't everyone scream that Don Imus needed to get fired?

Think about that. In one corner, you have a guy who is paid to try to be funny. He was also being paid to push the envelope and be controversial. In the other, you have a woman who is paid to do play-by-play, and is probably not being asked to push anything or be even remotely controversial.

So why didn't anyone cry that Tilghman should be fired?

Please note: I am not advocating that she lose her job. I thought it was a travesty when Imus got fired, and I would have thought the same had The Golf Channel dropped the hammer on Tilghman. But why is she skating, while Imus was raked over the coals?

(Credit here to Tiger Woods, too. Woods quickly has tried to remove himself from the controversy. Moving on is the best thing to do here. Now that I've made my dumb statements on this, we'll do exactly that.)

NFL playoff quick hits. The Packers don't have a layup on Saturday, but should win. Jacksonville's physicality will only matter if David Garrard is sharper than he was in Pittsburgh last week. Oh, and they're playing the Patriots, so not much will matter if the Patriots are as ready to play as I expect them to be. This isn't the week to look for an upset of that juggernaut. The Colts need a healthy Marvin Harrison to win, but the Chargers may need Antonio Gates more. Too bad Jessica Simpson won't be on hand in Dallas Sunday, as her squeeze is likely to fare better against that beaten-up Giants secondary than Jeff Garcia did. That's fine. Maybe we can arrange for her appearance in some sort of skimpy, Dukes of Hazzard-esque item at the NFC Championship Game.

AN OPEN LETTER TO SENATOR JOHN KERRY

**The following is not text of an actual letter being sent to the loser senator. I'm too lazy to buy a stamp.**

December 26, 2007

U.S. Senator John Kerry
304 Russell Bldg.
Third Floor
Washington D.C. 20510

Dear Senator Kerry

First off, belated thanks to you on running your 2004 presidential campaign incompetently enough as to ensure four more years of That Guy. Next time, why not get caught with a prostitute in the middle of the primaries so someone else can get a shot?

Anyway, that's not the point of my letter today. Senator, I wanted to congratulate you on winning your political game with the NFL office, mainly Commissioner Roger Goodell, whom you have successfully persuaded to make an NFL Network game available on regular television.

You spoke loudly about the need for everyone Patriots fans to see the game. It is a noble cause, as the Patriots are taking a shot at an unprecedented 16-0 regular season. And since only 40 percent of American homes get the NFL Network, it would be tough for all those homebound New England fans to catch their team's shot at history.

However, I have a couple questions, and only one of them is sarcastic in nature.

1. Where were you when the NFL Network's game actually mattered and meant something? Let's face facts. If New England wins this game, but loses a playoff game, they aren't remembered for going 16-0. They're remembered for not getting it done in the playoffs, despite being a transcendently good team. If New England loses this game and goes on to win the Super Bowl, they are remembered as being one of the greatest teams to ever take to an NFL field, even if they are "only" 18-1 instead of 19-0.

This game is meaningless on the standings. The Giants and Patriots have both clinched their playoff seeds, and it could be argued that the only way this game isn't a walkover for New England is if the Giants don't bench starters like Brandon Jacobs and Plaxico Burress, who are valuable but banged-up. And if they don't bench those starters, it could be argued that they're not doing something that is obviously in their best interest, since they're hitting the road for a playoff game next week.

On November 29, the Packers played at Dallas. Both teams entered the game 10-1, and the game was going to put one of them in the driver's seat for home-field advantage in the NFC playoffs. Not only that, but it was a matchup of two of the NFL's great traditional franchises, with fans planted all over the country. Somehow, Senator Kerry, you didn't have a problem with that game being on the NFL Network, where upwards of 60 percent of America couldn't see it in their homes, even Packer fans in your home state of Massachusetts, who probably had to hunt out a Packer-friendly bar somewhere.

Way to care about your constituents, Senator.

2. What about these poor fans of 48 Hours - Mystery, High Crimes, and Law and Order: SVU? You've just taken their shows away on Saturday, all in the name of your political game. I hope you're proud.

And what about those fans of My Chemical Romance? They've been waiting all week to see their performance on Saturday Night Live, and now the show won't be on time because the football game will surely run past 11:30pm Eastern time.

Poor people. More pawns in John Kerry's latest political game.

(Guess which one was sarcastic. If you can't figure it out - and I'm guessing that, as a relatively humorless U.S. Senator, you can't - it's the second one.)

I'm all for access to football games. But in an era where the NFL has allowed DirecTV to have a stranglehold over satellite distribution of out-of-market games (for a price that exceeds $1 per game), it's rather silly for Kerry or any other politician to get all in a fuss over a game like this.

10.1 million people found a way to watch Cowboys-Packers. If they really cared, they'd do it again for Giants-Patriots. The NFL doesn't need to play favorites with the Patriots and cave in to political heat in order to increase access. If anything, they've hurt the marketability of their own channel, and perhaps doomed it for failure. After all, if anything of potential historic significance is ever again relegated to the NFL Network, the league knows that they've set a rather awkward precedent with this Saturday's game.

Oh, wait. I forgot to sign the letter. Thanks for your time, Senator.

Now go away.

Sincerely,
Bruce Ciskie
Sports fan who actually made an effort to get the NFL Network