First Things First:
I want to bitch about something that's not related to football. It's okay. Together, we can make it through this.
Remember the "Fun Size" or "Bite Size" candy bars they used to give away during Halloween? Well, they still give them away. But, I had one today and it was about as thick as my thumb and half as long. I remember when they were longer and at least twice as thick.
My point is that the fight against child obesity has gone too far. Candy bars are getting smaller because people are afraid that kids will get too fat. You've seen the commercials. There's a child version of Jared, the Subway guy. Chubby kids are being forced to get into shape.
I know about diabetes and hypertension and heart attacks and all that. The problem is that, when I was a kid, the larger "Bite Size" candy bars required two bites. Sometimes three. This involved work. If I was riding a sugar high, more bites meant more work. Eventually, I'd give up. Plus which, I couldn't cram more than one of the big Bite Size candy bars in my mouth at once. I could get two or three of the smaller ones in my mouth at that age. So, if you're a kid, on a tremendous sugar high, unknowingly re-enacting the Heather Graham/Julianne Moore scene from Boogie Nights (with the only exception being that your Mom would alway answer "Yes" when you asked, "Are you my Mom?"), and you're able to cram this many Fun Size candy bars in your mouth, you're going to eat more candy in a sitting.
And, since the sugar high would get more and more intense until you crashed, you'd eat waaaaay more candy total for the night. Once your body gets used to all that sugar, it craves it. If it involves too much work, you're less likely to do it. This is also why I think condoms are a bad method of birth control. Too much wrapper, too many steps, too fleeting an erection. Why not just go for it? But I digress.
And yes: I'm at least 40 pounds overweight.
Preview, For God's Sake:
I hate to sound like the ultimate homer, but I really think we're going to win this game. And, aside from the fact that I'd give anything to break the three-way tie between us, the Browns, and the freakin' Raiders, I want us to win this game for other reasons.
I want to win this game to rub it in Pat Bowlen's face.
Before the season, Bowlen said that he wouldn't be willing to play the Steelers in the Thursday opener at Heinz Field (the season opener for the NFL season has usually pitted the Super Bowl champion - yep, we won the Super Bowl last year- against whoever they beat in the previous year's championship game). Bowlen said it was "too soon." He didn't want his players to go through that. What is this, an ugly divorce? Was Bowlen thinking about the children? Won't someone please think about the children!?!?
Speaking of children, I thought the NFL was a multi-billion dollar business, not a bunch of grown-ups trying to watch over underprivileged children in the schoolyard. Do they want a do-over? Was the sun in Champ Bailey's eyes when he missed that interception? I'm sure there was a car in the road. Denver didn't want to come back from halftime because dinner was ready and they had to be at a recital later.
Why couldn't the NFL say, "Uh... we want ratings, not to protect the fragile egos of your kids. Play the games on the schedule and GO GET YOUR FUCKIN' SHINEBOX!" Maybe it's just me.
Anyway, I want us to win to shut him up. To show him that we can beat the Broncos in the opener, on the moon, even when we're 2-5. And then they should shine our shoes. Hard work builds character in a child. And, if they worked a little harder, they wouldn't be so obese.
Why We'll Win:
We're actually playing well at home. We're 2-1. And the only loss came in that freakin' game against the Bengals. I'm not saying we won't commit 5 turnovers in this game, because, nowadays, you never know, but we've been playing well at home. The fans will be fired up. Cowher had that "angry drinker face" going all week, like a father under pressure that's had three martinis. His wife just called him a failure, the kids are screaming, his head is spinning, he should have just told the boss to shove it. Eventually, he's going to snap. In the meantime, he's going to be one angry son of a bitch and make the kids mow the lawn six times a day, just because he can.
He'll have the team fired up. They're ready to show everyone that they're not done yet. Ben has hopefully cleared some of the cobwebs. The offensive line (possibly minus Hartings), will show up and be angry. And, when it comes down to it, the offensive line just needs to be angry and determined. It's the same guys every week. They don't shrink or become weaker week to week. It just seems to be a matter of whether or not they want it more than the guy across from them. In Kansas City, they wanted it more. In Atlanta, Jacksonville, and San Diego, they didn't. This week, they will. Or, they should. Damnit, they better.
From a strategic standpoint, they play a lot of man-to-man on defense. They play it better than any other team in the league. Their linebackers run like safeties, cover like cornerbacks, and hit like, well, linebackers. Their safeties cover like linebackers and hit like linemen. And run like an 80 year-old woman with a bad hip. Their corners, led by Champ Bailey, are good.
The big thing, though, is that they play a lot of man-to-man. And our guys, if nothing else, run good routes. Even if the guy covering you is a better player, you still have an edge because at least you know where you're going. Our guys, when the defense mans-up on them, tend to rip the guys covering them apart. See the Atlanta game. And the Cincy game. And the Kansas City game. When Miami went man, we shredded them (ask Heath Miller). It could be that we suck against zone defenses. But I prefer to say that we're really good against man coverage. Zones confuse Ben. Horribly. I think this is a good time to mention that Oakland plays mostly zone. Or, at least they did when we played them.
Denver can't produce a pass rush. Even if they could against other teams, their defensive line consists of a bunch of guys who used to play for Cleveland and weren't good enough to hang on with the Browns. And they don't blitz much, if ever.
When the Broncos have the ball, all they can do is run it. They ran all over Indy, but Indy gives up 158 yards a game on the ground. We don't. When we face a team that can only run the ball, we usually dominate. We need to put the ball in Jake Plummer's hands and wait for him to screw up. It happened in the AFC Championship Game and it will happen on Sunday.
We'll stop the run, confound Plummer (seriously, Rod Smith is 100 years old and I dare you to name another receiver on the roster beyond Javon Walker), and pounce on those few, key turnovers.
Why We Won't Win:
18 turnovers in 7 games. In two of those games (both wins) we comitted a total of two turnovers. That means that, in five losses, we've committed SIXTEEN turnovers. We'll lose if Ben plays like he did against Oakland. Or everyone else plays like they did against Atlanta and Cincy.
Denver's fired up, too. Their defense got beat to hell and back by the Colts last week. Their nose is bloody. The question is whether they'll respond like Skutt Farkas and cry, or respond like Jean-Claude Van Damme and beat the crap out of us. In French.
Here's the worst part. WE'RE THREE POINT FAVORITES! Either Vegas has completely lost their minds, or they're trying to motivate the Broncos. I'm not sure which it is. I do, however, refuse to believe that a rational thinking person thinks we're going to win by three.
I mean, I think we're going to win by ten. So there you go.
Prediction: Steelers 20, Broncos 10
No comments:
Post a Comment