The Sportz Assassin College Football Playoff

So, here has been my playoff proposal for years now: Have all six BCS champions in the playoffs, have the top ranked non-AQ school in and then five at large bids. The seedings would be according to the final BCS standings (which means the top 5 non-champions make it in). The only concession on the seeding is due to keeping two conference teams from playing each other until, at least, the Semifinal round. Easy, eh?

1-Auburn (SEC Champ)
2-Oregon (Pac 10 Champ)
3-TCU (top non-AQ team)
4-Stanford

12-UConn (Big East Champ) at 5-Wisconsin (Big Ten Champ)
11-Virginia Tech (ACC Champ) at 6-Ohio State
10-Boise State at 7-Oklahoma (Big XII Champ)
9-Michigan State at 8-Arkansas

Here would be your TV schedule.

December 18th
12pm: UConn at Wisconsin
3pm: Michigan State at Arkansas
6pm: Virginia Tech at Ohio State
9pm: Boise State at Oklahoma

December 25th
12pm: Mich State/Oklahoma/Boise State at Auburn*
3pm: Oklahoma/Boise State/Arkansas at Oregon*
6pm: Ohio State/Virginia Tech at TCU
9pm: Wisconsin/UConn at Stanford

*If Arkansas beats Mich State, they would play Oregon instead of SEC-rival Auburn. That would mean the Oklahoma/Boise State winner would play Auburn.

January 1st
3pm: Semifinals
8pm: Semifinals

January 10th
8pm: Championship game

The Sportz Assassin Bowl Schedule

If we have to have the BCS ... ick ... then why not use it the right way? Why do we have this poll just to pit the No. 1 and No. 2 teams against each other? Why not putting No. 3 vs No. 4? And so on.

So this is how my BCS bowl schedule would look:

BCS CHAMPIONSHIP: Auburn vs Oregon. We got this game already.

FIESTA BOWL: TCU vs Stanford. The 3rd and 4th place teams in the BCS standings. Put them in the Fiesta Bowl because ... well.

ROSE BOWL: Wisconsin vs Oklahoma. According to the standings, Ohio State is ranked higher than Oklahoma. But since they share the Big Ten with Wisky, No. 7 Oklahoma gets the nod.

SUGAR BOWL: Ohio State vs Arkansas. This one is happening in real life.

ORANGE BOWL: Michigan State vs Boise State. A very interesting game we would have had down in Miami.

CAPTIAL ONE BOWL: LSU vs Missouri.

OUTBACK BOWL: Virginia Tech vs Oklahoma State.

CHICK FIL A BOWL: Nevada vs Alabama

COTTON BOWL: Texas A&M vs Utah

GATOR BOWL: Nebraska vs South Carolina

INSIGHT BOWL: Miss State vs West Virginia

CHAMPS BOWL: Florida State vs Hawaii

After that, do what you want!

Let's Re-Rename the Bowls

Back in my day ... bowl games had normal names. It was very rare that a bowl had a sponsor for a name. Just over 20 years ago, that changed. Now, even bowls with historic names (like the Peach Bowl or Citrus Bowl) have been sponsor-ized (Chick-fil-A Bowl, Capital One Bowl).

Even those games with normal names are usually preceeded by some obscure sponsor. So who are these people?

Let's take it back to the old school and name our bowls the proper way.

We're fine with the Independence, Poinsettia, Armed Forces, Alamo, Military, Holiday, Music City, Pinstripe, Liberty, Sun, Gator, Rose, Fiesta, Orange, Cotton, St Pete, New Orleans, Humanitarian, New Mexico and Sugar Bowls.

Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl (Emerald Bowl): What? This was once the San Francisco Bowl ... then the Emerald Bowl. Even though the Emerald Bowl was named after a company that provides nuts to the world, it is much better than the KFHB!

BBVA Compass Bowl (All-American Bowl): Stupid name. This was once the PapaJohns.com Bowl. But let's go back a bit when the All-American Bowl was played in Birmingham. Let's go back to that.

GoDaddy.com Bowl (Mobile Bowl): No. I still don't know what GoDaddy.com does! Go back to just the Mobile Bowl.

Outback Bowl (Hall of Fame Bowl): I love Outback Steakhouse. I just ate there last Wednesday and had one of the best meals I've had in a long time. But this was once the Hall Of Fame Bowl and should be once again. Call it the "Outback Hall Of Fame Bowl" if you want, just bring the old name back.

Capital One Bowl (Citrus Bowl): No brainer. Nothing should make you more mad than the historic Citrus Bowl turned into a credit card event.

Chick-fil-A Bowl (Peach Bowl): I love Chick-fil-A, but I still call it the Peach Bowl. It is, has been and always will be the Peach Bowl to me. This renaming finishes second among the bowls that make me sick from their name change.

Insight Bowl (Copper Bowl): I don't like cable (I'm a DirecTV man) so I don't care about Insight. Go back to the cooler name of the Copper Bowl. It just fits.

Champs Sports Bowl (Tangerine Bowl): I spent the holidays in a lot of malls and I think I went into every mall's Champs Sports store. I bought nothing from any of them. Go back to the Tangerine Bowl. C'mon, Orlando!

Little Caesars Bowl (Motor City Bowl): Should be an easy fix. Just call it the Little Caesars Motor City Bowl and everyone will be happy. Football! Football!

Hawaii Bowl (Aloha Bowl): I don't have much of a problem with the name "Hawaii Bowl". But we had the Aloha Bowl for all those years. Let's get that back.

Las Vegas Bowl (Silver Bowl): Again, I'm not hating the LV Bowl name. But the Silver Bowl sounds much better. Especially when you would have the Copper Bowl just south of it.

Texas Bowl (Bluebonnet Bowl): I'm not a stickler for this one, but Bluebonnet Bowl brings back old memories. Texas Bowl sounds contrite.

TicketCity Bowl should go back to the Dallas Football Classic. Maybe go back a ways and call it the Dixie Classic again. The Meineke Car Care Bowl should go back to the original name of Queen City Bowl.

There, normal names. Let's go back to them, please!!!!

My Sports Wishes For 2011

Goodbye 2010! Hello 2011!

In the Sportz Assassin's sports world, 2010 was a mixed bag. My Lakers repeated as NBA Champions ... which was awesome. My Cincinnati Reds came out of no where and won the NL Central and actually making the postseason for the first time since 1995. However, my UNC Tar Heels fell off the map in basketball with a historically bad season and the football team was marred by an agent scandal. The Redskins dumped the Jim Zorn era for the Mike Shanahan era ... which was nice. However, the same circus that surrounds this team still exists.

And even worse than any of that -- Duke wins the NCAA Tournament.

So, what would make a happy 2011 for me?

Well, a Laker three-peat would be the capper. That would mean Phil Jackson would have 12 NBA titles and four 3-peats. It also would mean the Lakers would tie the Celtics for most NBA titles. The Laker season is boring because all I care about is getting to May and June.

As for my Heels, well, I hope on the basketball side of things they can get a decent seed in the tournament and (dreaming here) they can get out of the first weekend and into the Sweet 16. I want the Heels to finish in the top four of the ACC and (dreaming again) the Heels can nip Duke in one of their games.

As for football ... I want this mess cleaned up!

I hope the Reds can continue on their winning ways. Maybe another NL Central title is too much to ask ... but it is far from impossible. At least stay in the pennant race in September.

And my Redskins. I just wish we mattered again. It isn't hard.

NFL's Hypocritical Moving of Vikings-Eagles

The NFL moved the Vikings-Eagles game from Sunday night ... to Tuesday night. The reasoning? The NFL was a bit nervous that fans and stadium personnel could be stranded at Lincoln Financial Field after the night game ... and they don't want that.

This is the same league that has staged two Super Bowls in the Detroit area and one in Minneapolis. This is the same league that has had the Ice Bowl and a Bengals-Chargers game in negative-gajillion degree weather. This is the same league that touts the "Frozen Tundra" of Lambeau Field and night playoff games in New England.

I can give them a pass on that since those were all in years past and growth in safety is understandable in that aspect.

So they why hold a future Super Bowl in New York?

The NFL wanted a Super Bowl in the nation's largest city so badly that they thumbed their noses at that whole bad-weather thing and brought the game to the Big Apple. Fine.

But what if what happened this weekend happened during Super Bowl weekend? I mean, the NFL is hell-bent on having an 18-game schedule and doing so will most likely knock the Super Bowl to mid-to-late February. So what if a major storm hits the New York area during a Super Bowl? Imagine the nightmare of all those functions that New York will hold during that time ... not to mention the actual games.

And what if it is Dallas vs San Diego in that Super Bowl? Let's bring people in from those cities to try to hang with a blizzard. People in Buffalo and New England can deal with it: it's part of life. But ask the people in the South who just got him with nearly a foot of snow how they handled the weather.

Are the Vikings Leaving Minnesota For LA?

We may be seeing the last of the Vikings in Minnesota.

With one week remaining in the season (they play in Philly on Tuesday night and then at Detriot on Sunday), a possible lost NFL season in 2011 and their stadium ... which their lease runs out with after the 2011 season ... crumbling to pieces, it could be a wide open door for the Vikings to move to Los Angeles.

It is all set up for them. No one wants to see the Vikings leave the Twin Cities, but without a lease means they are without a home. The Metrodome may not even be worth fixing if there is no Vikings season on the horizon. And we all know that the massive snow storm that damaged the Metrodome's roof will happen again at some point.

When Zygi Wilf looks out there, he sees Los Angeles building themselves a nice new stadium. Nice and sunny new stadium. While the Twin Cities market (and the Vikings reach to the Dakotas, Iowa and Wisconsin) is nice ... it isn't Los Angeles. It would bring the Vikings to the NFL's second biggest market and would be only the 2nd NFC team in the state (the 49ers are the other). That means that So Cal fans could still see Chargers and Vikings games.

While I would never say it's a done deal ... I can say that this doesn't seem like a far out proposal either.

Now, if the Vikings do move to the Left Coast ... would the NFL keep them in the NFC North? While geography is a major factor in the divisional format, it doesn't trump everything. That's why Dallas plays in the NFC East, Baltimore in the AFC North and Miami in the AFC East. With the history there, the NFL could keep the Vikings in the NFC North.

But would it feel the same with the franchise moved? The NFL would be better off putting the Vikings in the NFC West with the Cardinals, Niners and Seahawks and putting the St. Louis Rams in the NFC North. The Rams should love that. The Rams-Bears rivalry would be big in central Illinois. Since Minnesotans are conditioned to hate the Packers, Bears and Lions, the Rams could snatch up that fan base. Plus they aren't stuck playing a slew of 4:00pm games each year.

Don't give me that "Rams don't really belong in that division" crap since ... well, why wouldn't they? The fact they play in "balmy" St. Louis? Have you seen Kansas City at this time of year? The fact they play in a dome? Um, the Vikings and Lions play in domes and have for 30 years or so. The fact that the Rams aren't historically a "black and blue" team? Neither was the Vikings in the Randy Moss era, the Lions during their run-and-shoot days or the Packers over the last 20 years. They have an emerging team that may win the NFC West next weekend.

This must we do know: the Vikings are unhappy about their situation and now have an out. Odds are they'll use it.

Maybe Michael Jordan Could Buy "Hornets" Name Back

One thing Charlotte basketball fans hate is the Bobcats. No, not the team, but the name "Bobcats". Michael Jordan said we he bought the team that he was willing to think about changing the name. Everyone seems excited.

Now comes word that the NBA may buy the New Orleans Hornets from George Shinn. Less than a decade ago, Shinn moved the Hornets from Charlotte to N'Awlins. Shinn went from being the most popular man in the city when he got the NBA to expand to Charlotte for the 1988-1989 season, to being the most hated man in the city's history.

So if the NBA owns the Hornets and the NBA still in love with Michael Jordan, could we actually see Jordan try to buy the Hornets name back for the city of Charlotte?

Everyone in Charlotte would go for that. I still see a few people wearing Charlotte Hornets stuff. It could make all that hatred go away and would actually make the Bobcats more popular in the city if they just changed the name and identity back to the Hornets. Stern could then resurrect two franchises.

It isn't like the Hornets have been a New Orleans staple. They are averaging less than 14,000 per game despite getting off to such hot start to the season. In their eight years or so in Louisiana, they spent a quarter of it calling Oklahoma City home after Hurricane Katrina hit. I think a city like New Orleans would relish being able to name a team after itself in some way (similar to the New Orleans Jazz of the 1970s). Let them go nuts and name a team.

Just give "hornets" back to Charlotte. The hornets nest has been a symbol for the city for a couple of centuries and it just fits right. Hopefully Stern and Jordan can work something out and make it happen.

World Sports Community (Again) Shows They Don't Need the United States

Earlier this year, the United States bid for the 2016 Olympic Games ... Chicago ... was beaten by Rio de Janeiro. That will be the first Games held in South America.

Today, the United States bid for the 2022 World Cup was beaten by Qatar ... the smallest country to every host the Cup. Ask most Americans and they have no idea where Qatar is.

In one year, the international sports community has basically said they don't need the USA like they used to.

Yeah, there are other factors out there. The fact that Rio would be the first Games in South America was a big selling point. Qatar is an oil rich nation and would place the World Cup in the part of the planet where events like this are rarely held. The USA has lost these things before and just did again.

What also is a factor is the fact that we're not that good at hosting these things. Sure, the 1994 World Cup was a success here ... even if the game hasn't caught the fire people predicted it would. But the 1996 Olympics in Atlanta was marred by a terrorist attack and an overkill of corporate powers that left a bad taste in the IOC's mouth. Then the 2002 Winter Games in Salt Lake City is best known for the gift-giving scandal that caused the IOC to overhaul its rules. We haven't done it correctly.

In the past, that didn't matter. The international sports community needed the United States so much that they looked past all these kinds of things. They point to the 1984 Games in Los Angeles which showed the world that the games (after sucking the last several cities dry) that a city can thrive because of the Olympics. That momentum continued in Seoul and Barcelona and allowed the United States to quickly get the games back just 12 years later.

The world knew that the corporate dollars would pour in. The world knew that the USA would make it quite a production. The world knew that many eyes would be watching the games and the USA is very "foreigner friendly" so fans from other nations would feel at home.

That isn't the case anymore. Our standing in the world has fallen a bit ... not to mention our likeability. The massive corporate dollars aren't there anymore -- at least not as much to sway an event here. And while we may be more "foreigner friendly" than anywhere else, things have changed where bringing an event like that would be a logistical nightmare in our New America.

Those things are true everywhere, however, so it is interesting why the USA keeps getting passed over. Maybe we've overstayed our welcome on the world stage. Maybe we need to prove that we are worthy of the Games and Cup ... instead of trying to say they are worthy of being here.

After Adding TCU, Will the Big East Now Split In Two?

TCU announced today that it was leaving the Mountain West Conference for the Big East. Makes sense because nothing says "East" like Texas (or Louisville, Marquette, DePaul).

The move gives the conference a rising football power ... making it a 9-team football conference. It also makes the hoops side of things a 17-team conference where everyone will play each other once and every team gets two "repeat games". The Big East also extended a invite for Villanova to move their football program up from FCS to become the 10th football member (Nova is already a member in all other sports).

With the conference ballooning up to ridiculous heights, will a break up of the Big East happen? After all, with football running things there is no reason for many of the schools to keep carrying the others.

With TCU in the fold, the football members would be smart to break off into their own conference (TCU, Syracuse, Pitt, West Virginia, UConn, South Florida, Cincinnati, Rutgers and Louisville). That would leave the non-football members (Notre Dame, Villanova, Georgetown, St. John's, Providence, Seton Hall, Marquette and DePaul) to hold their own hoops conference.

Those football schools don't really need the others. In fact, aside from losing Nova and G'town (Marquette and Notre Dame would be marginal losses), the football schools actually make up a more powerful hoops conference. Syracuse, UConn and Louisville have all won National Championships over the last 25 years while Pitt, West Virginia and Cincinnati have been powerhouses during that span. Rutgers is becoming more of a force leaving only TCU and South Florida as the only "bottom feeders".

Not like the non-football schools. Sure St. John's is trying to turn around their fortunes. So is DePaul and Seton Hall. But aside from losing New York City as the epicenter of the conference (which they still could host their tournament there with Rutgers still around), is there any other real loss?

Maybe. Notre Dame has a big national following. You would also lose the Philadelphia, Washington, New York, Chicago and Milwaukee markets ... something the Big East really doesn't want to give up. But maybe they all work something out and just have two separate "divisions" in the Big East Conference ... similar to how the NFC and AFC work in the NFL. They have their own divisions and do their thing but also can play some games against teams in the other division. Breaking up from a hoops standpoint doesn't make total sense.

But if there is anything we've learned about this conference realignment is that basketball doesn't matter. After all, why in the hell would TCU want to go to the Big East? Recruiting? TV exposure? The great basketball tradition? No, they want to go there so they can whip the other schools in football and have an easier time to a BCS game. I mean, TCU had to be PERFECT to get into a BCS bowl this year. Meanwhile, a mediocre UConn team could be the representative from the Big East in a BCS bowl.

Football drives this all. So it wouldn't surprise me to see the football schools leave the others behind.

R.I.P. Leslie Neilsen

Word just came that Leslie Neilsen has passed away. The world got just a bit less funnier.

Older cats knew Neilsen as a serious actor. Anyone under 40 knows that he starred in some of the funniest goofy comedies of the last 30 years.

This is a sports blog, but this is sort of a sports topic. After all, Neilsen starred in The Naked Gun films which also starred NFL legend O.J. Simpson. The first of the trilogy ended at a Mariners-Angels game where Neilsen sang the National Anthem, then was the home plate umpire then stopped Reggie Jackson from killing the Queen.

The Naked Gun movies were taken from the TV show Police Squad (if you don't know, go to netflix and check them out), and while many of the same gags appear in both places, both were hilarious in their own right.

My favorite Leslie Neilsen movie is Airplane! . I don't ever remember NOT knowing every line of that movie. The greatest gift Neilsen had was the fact he could play extremely straight and the comedy just launched all around him.

Are We Going to Enter Another Era Of Multi-Purpose Stadiums?

If you are in your mid-30s ... like me ... you remember the days where your local baseball team and football team shared the same stadium. The baseball experience gave us more foul ground and less fan interference. The football experience gave us funky site lines and blown knees.

We may have to get used to seeing that again. Maybe sooner than you think.

In our current economic climate, cities may look at getting more out of their stadiums. Last week, Wrigley Field (built nearly 100 years ago) hosted the Illinois-Northwestern football game. That night, New Yankee Stadium hosted Notre Dame-Army and will host the Pinstripe Bowl this winter.

While it isn't co-tenetcy (sorry if that's not a word) in the old fashioned sense, it is providing new revenue for an expensive lot just sitting around doing nothing. Right now, only two stadiums are homes to both an NFL team and an MLB team: Oakland Coliseum (Raiders, Athletics) and Dolphin Stadium (Dolphins, Marlins).

Back in the day, this was the norm:

-Three Rivers Stadium housed the Steelers and Pirates
-Riverfront Stadium housed the Bengals and Reds
-Shea Stadium housed the Jets and Mets
-Astrodome housed the Oilers and Astros
-Memorial Coliseum housed the Browns and Indians
-Memorial Stadium housed the Colts and Orioles
-Jack Murphy Stadium housed the Chargers and Padres
-Mile High Stadium housed the Broncos and briefly the Rockies.
-Veterans Stadium housed the Eagles and Phillies
-Metrodome housed the Vikings and Twins
-Fulton County Stadium housed the Falcons and Braves
-Kingdome housed the Seahawks and Mariners
-Candlestick Park housed the Niners and Giants
-Busch Stadium housed the both the football and baseball Cardinals
-Anaheim Stadium housed the Rams and Angels

That doesn't even take account stadiums like RFK, Wrigley Field, Yankee Stadium, Fenway Park or many of the really old digs that were NFL, AFL and baseball homes.

Of those 14 stadiums listed above, only Jack Murphy Stadium (now Qualcomm), Metrodome and Candlestick Park still operate as either an NFL or MLB stadium. The rest have been replaced by two brand new stadiums.

-Pittsburgh built Heinz Field and PNC Park
-Cincinnati built Paul Brown Stadium and Great American Ballpark
-New York built New Meadowlands Stadium and CitiField
-Houston built Reliant Stadium and Enron Field (now Minute Maid Park)
-Cleveland built Browns Stadium and Jacobs Field (now Progressive Field)
-Baltimore built Ravens Stadium (now M&T Bank) and Oriole Park
-San Diego built PetCo Park.
-Denver built Invesco Field and Coors Field
-Philadelphia built Lincoln Financial Field and Citizens Bank Park
-Minneapolis built Target Field
-Atlanta built Georgia Dome and Turner Field
-Seattle built Qwest Field and SafeCo Field
-San Francisco built Pac-Bell (now AT&T) Park
-St. Louis built TWA Dome (now Edward Jones) and New Busch Stadium

I doubt that we will see anything like that again and certainly not soon. Every city that has both a baseball and football team has a relatively new stadium that doesn't need replaced. But would a city ... especially a smaller market ... consider down the road building a multi-purpose stadium to save costs?

Until then, we may see some more college football games in baseball stadiums. College football could be the driving force behind what stadiums decide to do. Not only is Yankee Stadium hosting a bowl, but so does AT&T Park, Tropicana Field and Sun Life Stadium. Twelve NFL stadiums will host 15 bowl games this winter (University of Phoenix Stadium, Qualcomm Stadium and Superdome host two apiece).

Niche games like the ones played at Wrigley Field and Yankee Stadium could be more attractive. It's worked in the NHL where baseball stadiums have hosted the Winter Classic hockey game on New Year's Day.

The End Of An Era In Several Conferences

Here we are right after Thanksgiving and there is a bit of nosalgia about college football. Not so much that we are in rivalry mode ... but the fact that several of the conferences we know will be altered quite a bit next year.

The most notable was the Nebraska-Colorado game. Both were playing in their final Big XII game as both will peel off to other conferences next year. Nebraska heads to the Big Ten; Colorado heads to the Pac-10.

The Big Ten will have 12 teams and employ a divisional format that could stop some of the most historic rivalries in the sport (some of these teams have played nearly every year for a century). Colorado ... along with the Mountain West's Utah ... will move out west and turn the Pac-10 into the Pac-12. Just like the Big Ten, the Pac-12 will split into two divisions and break up the schools.

Obviously that means the Big XII will return just ten members next year. So next week's Big XII championship game will be the last one ... of course, until they decide to add more teams down the road. Next year, the Big XII will have a true round robin in the schedule and everyone will play everyone else every year.

That's really all of the BCS conferences right now, but the two other major conferences -- the WAC and Mountain West -- will be drastically altered. The Mountain West loses Utah to the Pac-12, remember, and will lose BYU as they become an independant in football and a member of the West Coast Conference in other sports. The leaves the current 9-team MWC with just 7 teams.

The WAC will lose a lot to the Mountain West. Boise State was/is the first to leave the WAC for the MWC and will be the 8th member of the conference in 2011. Fresno State, Hawaii and Nevada will all join in 2012, giving the conference 11 members. Hawaii isn't a given yet, but if they do join it will be in football only. No word if the MWC will go after a 12th team to get a championship game (Utah State?).

With the currently 9-member WAC losing Boise State, Nevada and Fresno State (and probably Hawaii) to the Mountain West, it would leave the WAC with just five members. To get at eight teams, the WAC reached down quite a few pegs to bring up Denver, Tx-San Antonio and Texas State.

Most of that won't happen until 2012 ... and most of you won't notice. Still, it is quite a sad and still exciting time to see the college football landscape change like this.

Stop Making NFL's Western Teams Play 1:00 Games

One of my pet peeves in the NFL scheduling is the fact that they keep scheduling western teams to play at eastern time zone teams in the 1:00 game.

Two years ago when I was working for AOL's FanHouse, I posted that NFL's western teams struggle when playing those games. In that post, those western teams were 0-12 (I'm not going back to see how it all ended up). Two years later, it is still the case.

This is the teams in the Pacific and Mountain time zones (Broncos, 49ers, Raiders, Cardinals, Seahawks and Chargers) playing teams in the Eastern time zone at 1:00pm ET. That means they are playing at 10am/11am local time. That's rough for a team that spends most of its season on the left coast.

There is less of a sample this year than in years past. The NFC West play the AFC West in the cross-conference scheduling format so any eastern games are limited to conference games. So far, there have been six that have been scheduled at 1pm:

Broncos at Jaguars
Broncos at Niners (in London)
Cardinals at Falcons
Raiders at Steelers
Niners at Falcons
Niners at Panthers

They are 0-6 in those games. Well, 1-6 if you count the fact that it was the Niners that beat the Broncos in London ... but then it isn't really a fair variable since both teams were western teams and one of them had to win.

So when a western team plays a 1pm ET game in the eastern time zone ... they are 0-5.

You could point to several reasons for this. Sure, the AFC and NFC West are probably the two worst divisions in the NFL ... and that doesn't factor in Central Time Zone teams like the Rams or Chiefs. You could say that most of the teams they have played were against teams among the league's elite (Steelers, Falcons). But how does that explain the Niners losing in Carolina to the Panthers? That one win could be the only one Carolina gets all year.

Is the Vince Young Era Over in Tennessee?

Vince Young left the 19-16 overtime loss to the Washington Redskins with an injured thumb. Titans head coach Jeff Fisher says that even if the thumb is fine, Young is no longer the starter.

Sounds kind of harsh, eh?

Well, not when you hear that when Young was finally shut down for the game (he was trying to get back in), he threw his shoulder pads up into the stands, came back out in street clothes and then bolted the team early and went home.

Fisher, at the post game press conference, said that there was no excuse for Young's actions and that he won't be the starter next week.

With the history of bad leadership from Young in Tennessee, is it time for them to cut bait and move on?

Shouldn't NASCAR's Finale Be a Demolition Derby?

Today is the final race in the NASCAR season (not too much longer before the first race of next season). Right now, Denny Hamlin, Jimmie Johnson and Kevin Harvick are in the running to take home the Sprint Cup championship. It's the first time the title has been up in the air since NASCAR when to the Chase format in 2004. Should be great racing.

Now, I'm not a racing guy so forgive me if this sounds dumb. But why is NASCAR more about "I" then "team"? I mean, why do they have "teams" but NASCAR is telling everyone to let the race happen?

I mean ... duh. NASCAR can't have a demolition derby where Hamlin's, Johnson's and Harvick's teammates take out their competitors. It's not good for the sport nor is it good for the TV viewing audience. After all, Johnson and Harvick would have their teammates try and take out Hamlin in the very first lap if they were smart. That's what a good teammate would do.

In hockey, those guys are called enforcers. They used to have them in basketball (some still exist). In baseball, you get "purpose pitches" to send a message. We have various defensive players ... and Hines Ward ... who get excited about knocking someone out of a game.

If NASCAR has teams, then why aren't they allowed to use them? I mean, what's the point of having teams? I know, it's stupid.

Granted, NASCAR is actually more worried about a teammate "letting" one of the drivers finish ahead of them in order to have a better shot at the Cup Championship. If Dale Earnhardt Jr is up at the front of the pack, why wouldn't he help teammate Johnson by blocking out the others in the Chase and letting Johnson pass him by?

And what if a teammate doesn't care about NASCAR's demands and does take someone out? What would NASCAR really do? Fine the team? Well, you'd have to prove that it wasn't an accident ... and even if you do, are you going to actually rip the title out of someone's hands? You can't really deduct points from the winner if he had nothing to do with the wreck.

It's unlikely, though it is interesting.