Back and forth, back and forth. It was a see-saw-like finish on Saturday night, when the Texas Tech Red Raiders outlasted the Texas Longhorns in an instant classic.
There was a comeback, a controversial call, fans all over the field and a finish which I believe may already be airing on ESPN Classic.
Early, the matcgh was all Raiders, with them getting on the board every way they could: a safety, a field goal and a major. Their defence held the Longhorns offense to just three yards after the first quarter and held them to only two field goals at the half – but the game quickly turned into a Graham Harrell/Colt McCoy duel, the kind football doesn’t see nearly enough of.
Down 22-6 at the half, Longhorns quarterback Colt McCoy led his team to a near improbable comeback, driving down the field with seeming ease: 58 yards in two and a half minutes; 91 yards in 14 seconds; 80 yards in just over four minutes. McCoy was airing the ball with ease, making huge plays and spreading the Raiders defence thin. He would finish the night with two touchdowns and almost 300 yards passing, the majority of them in the second half.
That 91-yard touchdown seemed to send a message: Texas was still in this game, and the Raiders pounded back in response. They moved to the Texas 12, where a touchdown would have sealed the win. But after a 15-yard penalty and three straight incompletions later, they settled for a field goal. 32 – 26, for Tech.
So the Longhorns were still in the game, then. McCoy passed and ran them all the way down to the Texas five-yard line, where Foswhitt Whittaker ran in the go-ahead major: 23-22 Texas, with just 1:29 left. Then Harrell took the Raiders on his back.
Four straight passes led the Raiders to the Texas 28. Game over, right? After all, they needed just a field goal, something they had been hitting all game. Simple, no risk involved. But on Harrell’s next pass, the ball took a funny deflection – one that was almost picked off by Texas. A lucky break for the Raiders.
Harrell followed it with a pass to his right, to Michael Crabtree along the sidelines, who ran it in for a touchdown with only a second to play. Fans come pouring onto the field from all over, crowding the players and forcing the goalposts to get lowered. All the while, the replay booth is checking the catch: did Crabtree step out of bounds?
As it turned out, he didn’t, the extra point was good and the field had to be cleared again. One second left… Well, stranger things have happened. But not tonight: the kickoff was lateralled, then fumbled and Tech came up with it and the win.
Brent Musburger, one who has been prone to hyperbole, called the finish unbelievable. Indeed, it was one of the better – the best, even – finishes so far this season.
Plus, it was both a huge upset and a huge night for the Raiders. Just look at the numbers: 579 total yards, with McCoy throwing 474 of them. Two recievers with over 125 yards reciving. Nearly 37 minutes of possession. 32 first downs. One turnover. One hell of a finish.
And a win over the number one ranked team in the country.
Sunday, November 02, 2008
Saturday, October 25, 2008
Cole's calls
I was struck by a thought early on Saturday evening: there is an uncanny amount of Bob Cole in CBC’s new intro the Hockey Night. His calls seem omnipresent, yelling names from hockey’s modern age: Yzerman, Gretzky, Lemieux. He appears more, perhaps, then any other of the long list of Hockey Night personalities, but there’s one key difference: he’s the only one who doesn’t say his name.
Perhaps this is because his voice is so well-known among hockey fans. Perhaps it was a slight oversight. But perhaps – and this is my point today – the CBC is quickly moving towards the post-Bob Cole era.
For almost all of the 1980s and right up until last year, Bob Cole was the voice of Hockey Night In Canada. He called most of the Islanders four Stanley Cups, as well as all of the Oilers (in an oddity, the only year he didn’t – 1986, when CTV broadcasted the games nationally – the Oilers were upset by the Flames in the second round).
His streak at the microphone is not something altogether unheard of at the CBC. Foster Hewett called games for 40 years, for example. But in an age where announcers quickly become media personalities or spokespersons – one need only to look at John Madden or Marv Albert, for example – Cole remained primarily a hockey guy.
Not to say he didn’t dabble. He called Olympic events (including hockey). Curling.
But he never did anything self-promotional: there was no The Bob Cole Interview. No Bob Cole Hockey, though he did voice over work earlier this decade for 2k Sports. No books. Not even a radio show.
Granted, Cole was far from universally loved. Often criticized as a homer for the Leafs, the team whose games he usually broadcasted, Cole remains an enemy to a segment of devoted Habs and Senators fans. Fair enough. Others cite his tripping over names – Sedin becomes Sundin, etc - as a peeve.
But then, if some announcer from the past, like the always-objective Ray Scott, replaced Cole, these same fans would be complaining about the dry commentary: “Starr… to Dowler … touchdown” doesn’t sell like it used to. Fans love colour, they love subjectivity: this is why Gus Johnson is popular. This is why Chuck Swirsky is popular.
It’s why ESPN Classic used to use a Brent Musberger soundbite in its ads.
Anyway, just a thought about Cole.
Perhaps this is because his voice is so well-known among hockey fans. Perhaps it was a slight oversight. But perhaps – and this is my point today – the CBC is quickly moving towards the post-Bob Cole era.
For almost all of the 1980s and right up until last year, Bob Cole was the voice of Hockey Night In Canada. He called most of the Islanders four Stanley Cups, as well as all of the Oilers (in an oddity, the only year he didn’t – 1986, when CTV broadcasted the games nationally – the Oilers were upset by the Flames in the second round).
His streak at the microphone is not something altogether unheard of at the CBC. Foster Hewett called games for 40 years, for example. But in an age where announcers quickly become media personalities or spokespersons – one need only to look at John Madden or Marv Albert, for example – Cole remained primarily a hockey guy.
Not to say he didn’t dabble. He called Olympic events (including hockey). Curling.
But he never did anything self-promotional: there was no The Bob Cole Interview. No Bob Cole Hockey, though he did voice over work earlier this decade for 2k Sports. No books. Not even a radio show.
Granted, Cole was far from universally loved. Often criticized as a homer for the Leafs, the team whose games he usually broadcasted, Cole remains an enemy to a segment of devoted Habs and Senators fans. Fair enough. Others cite his tripping over names – Sedin becomes Sundin, etc - as a peeve.
But then, if some announcer from the past, like the always-objective Ray Scott, replaced Cole, these same fans would be complaining about the dry commentary: “Starr… to Dowler … touchdown” doesn’t sell like it used to. Fans love colour, they love subjectivity: this is why Gus Johnson is popular. This is why Chuck Swirsky is popular.
It’s why ESPN Classic used to use a Brent Musberger soundbite in its ads.
Anyway, just a thought about Cole.
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Another NHL team in Toronto? No thanks!
It’s a juicy rumor, one that’s been reported by media outlets all around North America. The NHL, looking to expand, wouldn’t mind putting a second team in Toronto.
It’s just a rumor, but it’s the kind you just want to believe: Toronto, for all of it’s teams woes, is supposed to be a good hockey town. It’d be a good way for the NHL to increase its profile in Canada.
I’m not sold on it quite yet.
For all of the pomp and pageantry surrounding the Maple Leafs, Toronto is not a good hockey town, just as how New York is not a good baseball town. A Leafs town, yes, but not a Hockey town. Big difference.
Take the Toronto Road Runners for example. A minor league brother to the Edmonton Oilers, they were to take the old Maple Leaf Gardens as their home rink upon moving to the city in 2003. Blocked by the Leafs. They ended up in the Ricoh Colliseum instead and were forced out after a dispute with management of that rink – some say so the Leafs could move their own team, the Toronto Marlies, into the rink instead. The Roadrunners moved to Edmonton the next year.
Take the city itself: where would another team play? The only arena big enough to house a team long-term would be the Gardens, a decrepit, crumbling mass that the Leafs refuse to let anybody use for anything, ever (except to make a supermarket, in a plan that doesn’t seem to be going anywhere).
Take the NHL’s state of affairs: the NHL would like to expand again, but this time into the United States: Kansas City, Las Vegas and Oklahoma City seem likely, and one can’t rule out AHL cities like Houston or Seattle.
But with the NHL running like it is now – Forbes reported that 14 of its teams had a negative operating income in 2007 - expanding would not be a wise idea. Indeed, relocation would be wiser, so the NHL can move teams from poor markets (Long Island, Nashville, Phoenix, etc) to better markets (Hamilton, for example).
But herein lies the rub: there aren’t many untapped hockey markets left. You could even argue there aren’t any. Hamilton and area could support a team, or leech fans from the Buffalo Sabres. Houston could support a team, but it’s unlikely the Dallas Stars are missing any hockey fans in Texas.
So maybe instead of dropping more teams in cities that don’t care about hockey and instead of shuffling teams around from city to city, maybe the NHL should begin to consider eliminating some teams. Buy out two or four owners, dissolve the team and disperse the players in a common draft.
The quality of play will likely rise. The debt load of the league will likely drop. In the short term, it may make the NHL look even worse, but in the long run it could seriously help the league out of the hole it seems to be buried in.
It’s just a rumor, but it’s the kind you just want to believe: Toronto, for all of it’s teams woes, is supposed to be a good hockey town. It’d be a good way for the NHL to increase its profile in Canada.
I’m not sold on it quite yet.
For all of the pomp and pageantry surrounding the Maple Leafs, Toronto is not a good hockey town, just as how New York is not a good baseball town. A Leafs town, yes, but not a Hockey town. Big difference.
Take the Toronto Road Runners for example. A minor league brother to the Edmonton Oilers, they were to take the old Maple Leaf Gardens as their home rink upon moving to the city in 2003. Blocked by the Leafs. They ended up in the Ricoh Colliseum instead and were forced out after a dispute with management of that rink – some say so the Leafs could move their own team, the Toronto Marlies, into the rink instead. The Roadrunners moved to Edmonton the next year.
Take the city itself: where would another team play? The only arena big enough to house a team long-term would be the Gardens, a decrepit, crumbling mass that the Leafs refuse to let anybody use for anything, ever (except to make a supermarket, in a plan that doesn’t seem to be going anywhere).
Take the NHL’s state of affairs: the NHL would like to expand again, but this time into the United States: Kansas City, Las Vegas and Oklahoma City seem likely, and one can’t rule out AHL cities like Houston or Seattle.
But with the NHL running like it is now – Forbes reported that 14 of its teams had a negative operating income in 2007 - expanding would not be a wise idea. Indeed, relocation would be wiser, so the NHL can move teams from poor markets (Long Island, Nashville, Phoenix, etc) to better markets (Hamilton, for example).
But herein lies the rub: there aren’t many untapped hockey markets left. You could even argue there aren’t any. Hamilton and area could support a team, or leech fans from the Buffalo Sabres. Houston could support a team, but it’s unlikely the Dallas Stars are missing any hockey fans in Texas.
So maybe instead of dropping more teams in cities that don’t care about hockey and instead of shuffling teams around from city to city, maybe the NHL should begin to consider eliminating some teams. Buy out two or four owners, dissolve the team and disperse the players in a common draft.
The quality of play will likely rise. The debt load of the league will likely drop. In the short term, it may make the NHL look even worse, but in the long run it could seriously help the league out of the hole it seems to be buried in.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
The decline and fall of Torry Holt - Tuesday NFL Notebook
The decline and fall of Torry Holt as a top tier fantasy player and other NFL notes
One friend of mine summed it up best: What happened?
The Dallas Cowboys, who had resided in the top ten of nearly everybody’s power polls, rankings and charts were beaten – soundly, at that – by the Rams, the hapless St. Louis Rams.
A monster day for Stephen Jackson (Three touchdowns, 160 yards) and a big day for Donnie Avery (65 yards, one touchdown) and a solid day from Marc Bulger (14/19, 173 yards).
But another tepid day for Torry Holt.
Once one of the most dynamite receivers in the league, and almost always a early-round fantasy pick, Holt has been quiet all season and looks to going downhill fast. At least on fantasy boards.
Only once this season has Holt caught a touchdown, and only once has he had more then 75 yards receiving. And according to ESPN’s stats, he’s on pace for just under 700 yards this season and only three touchdowns. This from the guy who just two years ago had 10 majors and 1,100 yards. What happened?
The double team and the collapse of the Rams offense happened.
With Isaac Bruce having left this offseason and the emergence of Stephen Jackson, the Rams offense has shifted from the long threat, the “Greatest show on turf” from the early part of this decade, to that of a running (and making short passes when needed) based set.
This fits the skill sets for most of the team: Marc Bulger is only throwing 20 or so passes a game now, often short, quick throws, and has found his groove. Stephen Jackson is running with success, especially against Dallas, and gives the team it’s scoring spark.
This leaves Holt as it’s major downfield threat. Thus the double team: for the most part, defences have been keying in and shutting down Holt with two defenders and haven’t had to worry about the rest of the receiving corps.
But this could change soon.
Donny Avery has emerged in the past little while as a threat. His numbers reflect his status as a number two wideout (at least), but he’s picking up solid yards and maybe some coverage. It’s not Bruce and Holt, for sure, but doesn’t Avery and Torry have a better ring to it?
Speaking of rings (or at least missing rings), I saw a show on the Buffalo Bills 1990 team the other day. Ahh, the glory days of Jim Kelly and Thurman Thomas, when the Bills were a great team to watch and played maybe the greatest Super Bowl of all time.
Right now in Buffalo, 1990 is suddenly back on a lot of peoples minds, I’m sure: the Bills have their best team since that season.
They’re five and one, lead a messed-up AFC East and are already the favourites to win the division. No longer are they posting comebacks – they handedly beat San Deigo on Sunday, 23-14.
Trent Edwards is throwing often and accurately: 25 of 30 for over 260 yards on Sunday. Marshawn Lynch is looking solid in the backfield and both Lee Evans and Josh Reed are downfield threats. They’re picking apart good defence while elevating theirs: on Sunday they shut down the Chargers: while Phillip Rivers threw for two scores, Ledanian Thomlinson was held to just 41 yards on 14 carries.
This wasn’t a fluke game for the Bills. They’re 10th in yards allowed right now, with just under 300 a game – a lower number then Dallas, Chicago or New England. Against the pass, they’re even better: eighth in the league: better then the Giants, Redskins or Buccaneers. The have the best point differential in their division
As we approach the halfway point of the season, the Bills are looking more and more like a contender: if not for the AFC East, then surely for the wild card. It’s not as if the competition is stiff: The Jets are floundering and the Dolphins have dropped their last two (so much for them being a sleeper).
Other notes: Tennessee is unbeaten and over-reported. I’m not sold on them yet: they haven’t beaten anybody that’s sitting over .500 after week seven. But next Monday’s game, at home against Indianapolis, will be their first big test… If the NFC South is the best division in the NFL (and it is), it’ll be neat to see who comes out of it: Tampa and Carolina are sitting on top, but don’t count out Atlanta yet: they’re young, feisty and they don’t have the same pressure the other teams do… Has there been a season where both Green Bay and Chicago are this good?
One friend of mine summed it up best: What happened?
The Dallas Cowboys, who had resided in the top ten of nearly everybody’s power polls, rankings and charts were beaten – soundly, at that – by the Rams, the hapless St. Louis Rams.
A monster day for Stephen Jackson (Three touchdowns, 160 yards) and a big day for Donnie Avery (65 yards, one touchdown) and a solid day from Marc Bulger (14/19, 173 yards).
But another tepid day for Torry Holt.
Once one of the most dynamite receivers in the league, and almost always a early-round fantasy pick, Holt has been quiet all season and looks to going downhill fast. At least on fantasy boards.
Only once this season has Holt caught a touchdown, and only once has he had more then 75 yards receiving. And according to ESPN’s stats, he’s on pace for just under 700 yards this season and only three touchdowns. This from the guy who just two years ago had 10 majors and 1,100 yards. What happened?
The double team and the collapse of the Rams offense happened.
With Isaac Bruce having left this offseason and the emergence of Stephen Jackson, the Rams offense has shifted from the long threat, the “Greatest show on turf” from the early part of this decade, to that of a running (and making short passes when needed) based set.
This fits the skill sets for most of the team: Marc Bulger is only throwing 20 or so passes a game now, often short, quick throws, and has found his groove. Stephen Jackson is running with success, especially against Dallas, and gives the team it’s scoring spark.
This leaves Holt as it’s major downfield threat. Thus the double team: for the most part, defences have been keying in and shutting down Holt with two defenders and haven’t had to worry about the rest of the receiving corps.
But this could change soon.
Donny Avery has emerged in the past little while as a threat. His numbers reflect his status as a number two wideout (at least), but he’s picking up solid yards and maybe some coverage. It’s not Bruce and Holt, for sure, but doesn’t Avery and Torry have a better ring to it?
Speaking of rings (or at least missing rings), I saw a show on the Buffalo Bills 1990 team the other day. Ahh, the glory days of Jim Kelly and Thurman Thomas, when the Bills were a great team to watch and played maybe the greatest Super Bowl of all time.
Right now in Buffalo, 1990 is suddenly back on a lot of peoples minds, I’m sure: the Bills have their best team since that season.
They’re five and one, lead a messed-up AFC East and are already the favourites to win the division. No longer are they posting comebacks – they handedly beat San Deigo on Sunday, 23-14.
Trent Edwards is throwing often and accurately: 25 of 30 for over 260 yards on Sunday. Marshawn Lynch is looking solid in the backfield and both Lee Evans and Josh Reed are downfield threats. They’re picking apart good defence while elevating theirs: on Sunday they shut down the Chargers: while Phillip Rivers threw for two scores, Ledanian Thomlinson was held to just 41 yards on 14 carries.
This wasn’t a fluke game for the Bills. They’re 10th in yards allowed right now, with just under 300 a game – a lower number then Dallas, Chicago or New England. Against the pass, they’re even better: eighth in the league: better then the Giants, Redskins or Buccaneers. The have the best point differential in their division
As we approach the halfway point of the season, the Bills are looking more and more like a contender: if not for the AFC East, then surely for the wild card. It’s not as if the competition is stiff: The Jets are floundering and the Dolphins have dropped their last two (so much for them being a sleeper).
Other notes: Tennessee is unbeaten and over-reported. I’m not sold on them yet: they haven’t beaten anybody that’s sitting over .500 after week seven. But next Monday’s game, at home against Indianapolis, will be their first big test… If the NFC South is the best division in the NFL (and it is), it’ll be neat to see who comes out of it: Tampa and Carolina are sitting on top, but don’t count out Atlanta yet: they’re young, feisty and they don’t have the same pressure the other teams do… Has there been a season where both Green Bay and Chicago are this good?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)