Monday, February 28, 2011

Reaction To 83rd Academy Awards

The Internet is abuzz today about the hosting job, who wore what, and winners and losers at the Academy Awards last night.
If you didn’t already know, The King’s Speech won for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Original Screenplay, and Best Actor (Colin Firth).  Inception also took home four wins, but they were in the less popular categories of Best Visual Effects, Best Cinematography, Best Sound Editing, and Best Sound Mixing.  The Social Network came in third with three awards for Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Original Score, and Best Film Editing.
I’ll agree with the consensus that the hosts, nominee James Franco and Anne Hathaway, were not near the quality of past comedians such as Bob Hope, Billy Crystal, or even Steve Martin, but at least Hathaway tried.  It seemed Franco was high the entire time and had little interest in the gig.  That is not to say there weren’t a few good lines throughout the night, but mostly the ceremony was a forgettable one.  It was especially not helpful that no acceptance speech was memorable, minus Melissa Leo’s, but that was because of the naughty word dropped in the middle.
What I will not agree with is that The King’s Speech was the best movie of the year.  I found Firth’s acting to be stellar and the movie was well made as a historical drama, but I felt there were multiple other films in the Best Picture category that should have deserved the Oscar over The King’s Speech.
Amongst my family and friends I came in first for the guessing game we play each year.  I tied an all-time self best with 18 correct selections out of 24 categories, missing Best Picture (I picked The Social Network), Best Director (again, The Social Network), Best Cinematography (True Grit), Best Costume Design (The King’s Speech), Best Animated Short Film (Day & Night), and Best Live Action Short Film (Na Wewe).
Since I had The Social Network winning the Best Picture category, obviously that was one of the films I thought was more deserving than The King’s Speech.  Another was The Fighter. The overall performances were better in The Fighter than The King’s Speech. I also would have accepted Black Swan or Toy Story 3 over the eventual winner.
Although I liked nearly ever nominated movie more than The King’s Speech, I knew it had a good chance of winning Best Picture.  Yet, I still feel it was fifth best as far as moviemaking goes.  The following are lists of how the Academy should have ranked the movies if more than just the winner was announced and showing my personal favorites regarding watchability and enjoyment.

Academy criterion:
The Social Network
The Fighter
Black Swan
Toy Story 3
The King’s Speech
Inception
True Grit
127 Hours
Winter’s Bone
The Kids Are All Right

Personal Favorites:
Inception
The Social Network
Toy Story 3
The Fighter
Black Swan
True Grit
Winter’s Bone
127 Hours
The King’s Speech
The Kids Are All Right

Friday, February 25, 2011

Correlation Between Oscars Best Film/Director

The 82nd Annual Academy Awards are only two days away and I am complete Oscar mode.  While prepping for tomorrow’s movie marathon, where I will see the final nominees up for Best Picture this year, I was wondering in the 81-year history of the awards how many Best Picture winners didn’t correspond with its filmmaker in the Best Director category. As of last year’s ceremony honoring the best movies made in 2009, there have been 21 mismatches when it came to the best picture and best director winners, which is to say that slightly more than 25 percent of ceremonies end with the unmatched Best Picture/Director combination.  While the first few years it was quite normal for the Best Director to not see the movie he helmed win the most coveted Best Picture Oscar, since about the fourteenth annual event on it has become quite sporadic.
The most disappointing example of this phenomenon was in 1998 when Saving Private Ryan didn’t win Best Picture, despite being the superior film to Shakespeare in Love, although Steven Spielberg was named Best Director of the year.  Another shocking case was in 1972 when Francis Ford Coppola didn’t win Best Director for The Godfather, my favorite film of all time.  However, the Academy made up for that oversight two years later with the sequel.
Below is a list of the years in which the winning director didn’t see his film win the top prize.

1928 (1st Annual Academy Awards Ceremony):
Picture – Wings (William A. Wellman)
Director – Frank Borzage (Seventh Heaven)
Note: Frank Borzage was the winner for Best Director of a dramatic film; Lewis Milestone won Best Director of a comedy for Two Arabian Knights; this was the only year the Academy separated the director awards into genres.

1929 (2nd):
Picture – The Broadway Melody (Harry Beaumont)
Director – Frank Lloyd (The Divine Lady)

1931 (4th):
Picture – Cimarron (Wesley Ruggles)
Director – Norman Taurog (Skippy)

1932 (5th):
Picture – Grand Hotel (Edmund Goulding)
Director – Frank Borzage (Bad Girl)
Note: Edmund Goulding was not up for a Best Director nomination.

1936 (9th):
Picture – Mutiny on the Bounty (Frank Lloyd)
Director – John Ford (The Informer)

1937 (10th):
Picture – The Great Ziegfeld (Robert Z. Leonard)
Director – Frank Capra (Mr. Deeds Goes to Town)
Note: Mr. Deeds Goes to Town was not up for a Best Picture nomination.

1938 (11th):
Picture – The Life of Emile Zola (William Dieterle)
Director – Leo McCarey (The Awful Truth)
Note: The Awful Truth was not up for a Best Picture nomination.

1940 (13th):
Picture – Rebecca (Alfred Hitchcock)
Director – John Ford (The Grapes of Wrath)

1948 (21st):
Picture – Hamlet (Laurence Olivier)
Director – John Huston (The Treasure of the Sierra Madre)

1949 (22nd):
Picture – All the King’s Men (Robert Rossen)
Director – Joseph L. Mankiewicz (A Letter to Three Wives)

1951 (24th):
Picture – An American in Paris (Vincente Minnelli)
Director – George Stevens (A Place in the Sun)

1952 (25th):
Picture – The Greatest Show on Earth (Cecil B. DeMille)
Director – John Ford (The Quiet Man)

1956 (29th):
Picture – Around the World in 80 Days (Michael Anderson)
Director – George Stevens (Giant)

1967 (40th):
Picture – In the Heat of the Night (Norman Jewison)
Director – Mike Nichols (The Graduate)

1972 (45th):
Picture – The Godfather (Francis Ford Coppola)
Director – Bob Fosse (Cabaret)

1981 (54th):
Picture – Chariots of Fire (Hugh Hudson)
Director – Warren Beatty (Reds)

1989 (62nd):
Picture – Driving Miss Daisy (Bruce Beresford)
Director – Oliver Stone (Born on the Fourth of July)
Note: Bruce Beresford not up for Best Director nomination.

1998 (71st):
Picture – Shakespeare in Love (John Madden)
Director – Steven Spielberg (Saving Private Ryan)

2000 (73rd):
Picture – Gladiator (Ridley Scott)
Director – Steven Soderbergh (Traffic)

2002 (75th):
Picture – Chicago (Rob Marshall)
Director – Roman Polanski (The Pianist)

2005 (78th):
Picture – Crash (Paul Haggis)
Director – Ang Lee (Brokeback Mountain)

Wednesday, February 23, 2011

Top 10 Scariest Movies

Recently watching Swedish vampire film Let the Right One In and its American remake Let Me In and thoroughly enjoying both, I was curious what my favorite horror movies were.  Going off of my IMDb ratings for the myriad of scary movies I’ve seen in years past, I was able to narrow things down to a list of the best ten movies to get your blood pumping.
While most of these films would sit solely in the horror genre, some cross over into other fields like science fiction or suspense.  However, the entries below are my favorite examples of movies that get viewers holding tight to one another, covering their eyes in order to not see the pain and gore coming next, or even leaving a bathroom light on or double-checking a closet for monsters after the final credits have rolled.  Some of the movies are the best in producing screams during the film and others have lasting effects from childhood that still haunt our dreams.
It should be noted that the title is a little misleading.  While most of these movies received high marks because of the literal fright experienced from the footage onscreen, a few were simply well-made, landmark movies that replaces cheap thrills and bloodcurdling violence with quote-worthy dialogue, iconic villains, unforgettable scenes, and award-worthy performances.  They aren’t on the list because they will have you crawling to your parents’ bed at night for comfort, but they are superbly done films that will have you on the edge of your seat.
Next to each title I have listed the IMDb rating for the film from myself first and then the general consensus rating.

Honorable Mention:
Some great horror movies that just didn’t quite make the list were The Innocents (8/8), Friday the 13th (8/6.3), and Misery (8/7.8).
Henry James’s novella The Turn of the Screw was superbly formatted for cinemas in 1961 as The Innocents with Deborah Kerr as governess Miss Giddens, who watches over two small children at a country estate in England.  It is a splendid psychological thriller as you never are sure whether the events in the movie are actually happening or if Giddens is mad.
Although the series is a punchline now and has spawned countless copycats that have made a farce of the horror genre, the original Friday the 13th is quite chilling for a first-time viewer.
What makes Misery so great is Kathy Bates’s performance.  As psychotic nurse Annie Wilkes, Bates alone is worth watching over and over again, making the rest of the film futile as all the viewer wants is more scenes with Wilkes in it.

10. Halloween (9/7.9)
Like Friday the 13th, the Halloween series, including the Rob Zombie revamp, is not worth the material it’s filmed on, minus the first in each group.  After more than three decades and 10 films, the sight of an immortal, knife-wielding maniac wearing a painted William Shatner mask doesn’t get the thrills like it did in 1978.  Popularizing the slasher film, John Carpenter made a “scream queen” out of then-unknown Jamie Lee Curtis, the daughter of a famous actress who stars in another movie on this list.  The characteristics of this film that made it so unsettling were the lack of motive for the killer, Michael Myers never uttering a word of dialogue, the first-person camera shots to represent the killer’s point of view, and the moody soundtrack. Halloween started a new trend of moviemaking that was followed by popular hits like the Friday the 13th, Nightmare on Elm Street, and Child’s Play series, and not so great slasher movies such as Prom Night, My Bloody Valentine, Sleepaway Camp, and countless others.

9. The Birds (9/7.9)
Alfred Hitchcock’s 1963 suspense movie The Birds is loosely based on the book by the same name from Daphne du Maurier.  Certainly not loaded with heart-stopping thrills and gore, The Birds is more of a thriller that has the viewer questioning the “what ifs?”  What if birds decided to turn on us and attack?  What if a town was suddenly turned upside down by the natural inhabitants that humans tend to so easily forget they coexist with?  What if there was no foreseeable end to the madness our former feathered friends would bring down upon us?  It is not the movie itself that is horrifying, but the impression it leaves behind that has us curious as to whether the animals we take for granted as friendly really are as safe to domesticate as we think they are.

8. Se7en (9/8.7)
Psychological manhunt films that have police detectives chasing after a themed serial killer are normally cheesy and the payoff is a bit of a letdown.  However, the Brad Pitt, Morgan Freeman, Kevin Spacey starring, David Fincher directing film is outstanding.  The seven the title is making reference to is the deadly sins: lust, envy, wrath, sloth, greed, pride, and gluttony.  Despite some overacting at the end of the film, each bizarre crime scene trumps the previous one in terms of the horrors and pain each victim must have suffered at the hands of his or her killer.  As the aftermath of each sin is realized and police learn more about the man they are chasing, we start to realize this John Doe character is the greatest psychopath movie audiences have seen since Norman Bates with possibly the most twisted criminal mind ever.

7. 28 Days Later (9/7.6)
Combining the two elements of zombies running fast and a virus infecting its host, which had been used before in zombie movies but never together, Danny Boyle’s 28 Days Later is a frightening tale of life in a lifeless world.  By 2003, zombie movies were played out and unoriginal in every way.  But Boyle put the focus back on what George Romero’s original Night of the Living Dead had done so well, and that was the relationship between people during a living-dead catastrophe.  Instead of trying to come up with interesting zombie deaths and mutilations that hadn’t been seen before, Boyle’s story centered around three survivors who link up with a military unit and the broken system an apocalyptic world creates.

6. Night of the Living Dead (9/8)
Let’s just get this out of the way right now: Night of the Living Dead is a terrible movie.  There.  I said it.  If you’ve actually seen the 1968 independently made movie from George Romero and you objectively reviewed it you would have the same outlook as I do.  The acting is beyond lame.  The zombies are dumb, slow-moving, and generally not that scary.  The makeup is poorly done.  It is a B-movie like so many bad science fiction films before it, but the thing that made this B-movie stand out among the others was the characterization.  It is hard to use that word characterization in a zombie movie, but if you can get past the stiff performances and shoddy dialogue and take a look at the subtext of what is taking place in the film between zombie attacks then the viewer will see that this film is an allegory for the fears and bigotry that was going on at the time.  Since the original became such a hit, every director, including Romero himself, has used the allegory excuse to try and make their zombie movie stand out, but nothing has ever beat the original.

5. The Shining (9/8.5)
Jack Nicholson’s axe-wielding chase through a hedge maze.  A downpour of blood emptying out of an elevator.  Jack’s “Here’s Johnny” introduction in the broken door.  Ghost twins eerily standing in the middle of a hotel hallway.  All work and no play make Jack a dull boy.  Redrum!  This movie is chock-full of great moments.  Slowly watching Jack’s descent into madness and the supernatural occurrences throughout the hotel hypnotically entrances the viewer.  The film is open to a number of interpretations as to what is actually the cause and outcome of the film, but one shouldn’t worry too much about this and instead enjoy what is in front of them, that being some of the most bizarre happenings ever captured onscreen and a batty performance from Nicholson.

4. Psycho (10/8.7)
Another Hitchcock entry, this movie starts out as a standard dramatic film about a woman, played by Jamie Lee Curtis’s mother Janet Leigh, who steals money from her place of employment and hits the road for her boyfriend’s place.  It isn’t until midway through the movie that we realize what is being viewed is a horror thriller film about a motel-running nutcase with unresolved mommy issues.  The shower scene alone is worthy of getting Psycho on any top ten list when talking about suspense and horror.  The soundtrack also is quite famous today, even among listeners who have not ever seen the film.  Psycho also benefits from being one of the first movies to be made after the lifting of the Production Code, popularly known as the Hays Code, which allowed for scenes like the opening one with unmarried people sharing a bed giving the movie an authentic feel about it.  Tame by today’s standards of horror moviemaking where gore and mutilation is substituted for substance and suspense, Psycho is considered one of Hitchcock’s best films he ever made.

3. Jaws (10/8.3)
Like Hitchcock’s The Birds, this film is terrifying because of the what if factor.  I never once thought about what was out in the ocean when swimming at the beach as a kid until after seeing Steven Spielberg’s Jaws.  Like so many other great horror and suspense movies, the music is what sets the chilling mood whenever the shark comes around for a bite to eat.  One of the great benefits to this movie, which was unintended on Spielberg’s part, was not seeing what the antagonist looked like for most of the movie.  Robert Shaw delivered one of the greatest characters ever for cinema and Spielberg crafted a sensational picture that left audience members afraid to go into the water.

2. Alien (10/8.5)
So effective was Jaws in 1975 that Ridley Scott pitched his 1979 science fiction horror film as “Jaws in space.”  Trapped in the confines of a space craft as a monstrous extraterrestrial life form terrorizes the crew, Alien delivered on every level as a great science fiction, horror, suspense, and/or action movie.  Like nothing audiences had ever seen before, the alien that the film’s title is speaking of is a lizard-like creature with a blade-tipped tail and elongated, cylindrical skull with secondary jaw that acts as a tongue.  As if the appearance of the alien weren’t terrifying enough, the beast also has acidic blood running through its veins that eats through metal and nearly all other substances.  Alien appeals to all types of audiences, ranging from the slow-paced thriller types to gore-fest enthusiasts.

1. The Exorcist (10/8.1)
Maybe it’s my religious beliefs, maybe it’s that I’m a big weenie when it comes to the horror genre, but The Exorcist is by far the most unsettling movie I’ve ever seen.  The dreadful acts a demon does while possessing a 12-year-old girl have upset me so much I’ve only been able to watch the movie once.  In conjunction with the disturbing premise and tremendous execution of the film itself, urban legends of mishaps on the set, some of which are claimed to be true and others were surely popularized to help promote the film, make this movie seem as if it is in fact cursed by the devil himself.  An appalling shocker that should be viewed, even if once is the only number of times you can take it, The Exorcist is the greatest horror movie to ever be seen in theaters.

Friday, February 11, 2011

Really Colin? Really?!

I don’t listen to Colin Cowherd very much.  Any listening that does take place in the Herd is normally for the few minutes during a commercial break on 1310 The Ticket’s BAD Radio program during my lunch break.  Since I don’t hear much of what Cowherd says I haven’t a real opinion on whether he knows what he is talking about, but my general opinion of his show is that his opinions come across as though they are supreme and anyone who disagrees is a lesser-thinking being.
During Monday's show following Super Bowl XLV Cowherd made a statement I felt pretty sure was ludicrous and after some research I have come to the decision that Cowherd’s argument, while not completely preposterous, is null.
The argument in question is that in the NFL, defenses win championships.  Cowherd’s claim is he thinks that is the way things may have been in the past, but in today’s league it is all about elite quarterbacks.  His wording was something similar to, “If you gave me a choice between a great defense and a great quarterback I will take the quarterback 100 times out of 100.”
While I’m one who lives under the defense wins championships mentality, I have not ever ruled out that having a great quarterback is also important to winning Lombardi Trophies.  In fact, I personally think a team has to have elite, great, and better than good players in every single position to be a championship-caliber team.  So where does history stand on the quarterback vs. defense argument.  Let’s take a look.
I have researched all quarterbacks, offenses, and defenses since the 2000 season. I figure going back all the way to the Packers and Steelers of the 60s and 70s wouldn’t be completely fair, as Cowherd pointed out the league has changed and is now a passer-friendly game.  So looking at the two teams who played in every Big Game since Baltimore and New York battled one another in 2001, here is a breakdown of the regular season statistics for every AFC and NFC championship teams.  I have included the rating for each quarterback and yards gained and given up and points scored and allowed by the offensive and defensive units.

2000 Season:
QB:
Trent Dilfer (Baltimore Ravens) – Only starting eight regular season games Dilfer was ranked the 20th best quarterback in the league with a rating of 76.6.
Kerry Collins (New York Giants) – Ranked 12th among quarterbacks with an 83.1 rating.
Offense:
Baltimore – Under the leadership of two quarterbacks, the Ravens were in the middle of the pack offensively at 16th in yards gained and 14th in scoring.
New York Giants –Ranked 13th in yards gained and 15th in scoring.
Defense:
Baltimore – Considered by some to be the greatest defensive unit ever in football, this group was ranked second in yards allowed and 1st in points given up.
New York Giants – A solid group, ranking fifth in both yards and points allowed.
Summary:
It is no secret the Ravens defense won them the Lombardi Trophy and nobody denies that. Dilfer, who took over for a benched Tony Banks midway through the season, was no elite quarterback.  Like Kerry Collins, the quarterbacks who led the Ravens and Giants were just good enough to get wins with the defenses doing the brunt of the work to hold opposing offenses to the bare minimum in points.  This season certainly was one in favor of the “defenses wins championships” motto.

2001 Season:
QB:
Tom Brady (New England Patriots) – Not the starter at the beginning of the season but taking over for an injured Drew Bledsoe in week 2, Brady's 86.5 passer rating ranked him sixth among the leagues quarterbacks.
Kurt Warner (St. Louis Rams) – Was the highest ranked quarterback with a 101.4 rating for the regular season.
Offense:
New England – The Patriots struggled to get yards, ranking 19th in the league, but were able to put points on the board, ranking sixth overall.
St. Louis – The Greatest Show on Turf had their way with defenses, as they ranked first in yards gained and scoring.
Defense:
New England – Like the offense’s divergence in yards and scoring, the Patriot defense was mediocre in stopping teams from going up and down the field, ranking 24th in yards allowed, but were able to keep teams out of the end zone, ranking sixth in points allowed.
St. Louis – The Rams defense didn’t slack off despite knowing their offensive counterparts would have no problem scoring enough to win games, as the defensive unit was ranked third in yards allowed and seventh in points allowed.
Summary:
It is certainly clear that from the regular season’s stats St. Louis was the better team with the best quarterback, the best offense, and the better defense.  New England had what would become an elite quarterback, but its offense and defense had some warts.  I would say that this season likely goes to the quarterbacks, but the defenses certainly weren’t slumming it.

2002 Season:
QB:
Brad Johnson (Tampa Bay Buccaneers) – As a Cowboys fan who saw what a decrepit figure this guy was late in his career, it amazes me he was ranked the third best quarterback in the league at one time, with a 92.9 rating.
Rich Gannon (Oakland Raiders) – Doing slightly better than his Super Bowl rival, Gannon had a 97.3 regular season passerrating, putting him at second in the league.
Offense:
Tampa Bay – Despite having the third best quarterback in the league, moving the ball and scoring was difficult for the Buccaneers, ranking 24th in yards gained and 18th in scoring.
Oakland – It is odd to see the Raiders successful in the new millennium, but during this season they had a prolific offense ranking first in yards and second in scoring.
Defense:
Tampa Bay – This unit was the personification of great, ranking first in yards and points allowed.
Oakland – The defensive side of the ball for the Raiders wasn't quite as stellar as the offense, but they were able to rank 11th in yards allowed and sixth in points allowed.
Summary:
For the eventual champion Buccaneers, this is a case of having an elite squad on one side of the ball and a legitimately productive quarterback under center.  Both units worked hand-in-hand to become the best team in the NFL.  The Raiders mostly profited from their offense and Gannon as quarterback, but the defense was nothing to slough off.  This season would go down as a tie for both the quarterback and the defense being essential to winning a championship.

2003 Season:
QB:
Tom Brady (New England Patriots) – Barely cracking the top ten, Brady finished with an 85.9 passer rating.
Jake Delhomme (Carolina Panthers) – With an 80.6 passer rating, Delhomme finished the regular season as the 14th best quarterback in the league.
Offense:
New England – Both of the conference champion teams were in the middle of the pack by the end of the regular season, with the Patriots ranked 17th in yards gained and 12th in scoring.
Carolina – The Panthers were slightly more consistent and mediocre than the Patriots, ranking 16th in yards gained and 15th in scoring.
Defense:
New England – Brady didn’t have to throw 50 touchdowns during the regular season, a feat he would accomplish later in his career, as the defensive unit was mighty good, ranking seventh in yards gained against them and allowing the fewest points per game in the league.
Carolina – The Panthers defense was functional, making it in the top third of the league in yards allowed at eighth and points allowed at 10th.
Summary:
Having Brady would lead one to assume the team’s offense was a powerhouse juggernaut, but he, along with Delhomme, were not the best passers the league had to offer and the offenses suffered for it.  However, the defenses were better than average and if a winner had to be decided I would say this season goes to the defenses.  While they certainly weren’t elite, they had to be better than the team they were up against since the offenses were so run of the mill.

2004 Season:
QB:
Tom Brady (New England Patriots) – Another season, another top ten finish for Brady, who ranked ninth among quarterbacks with a 92.6 passer rating.
Donovan McNabb (Philadelphia Eagles) – Prior to the very public T.O. break-up, McNabb was able to have a superstar season in 2004, ending up with a 104.7 rating that was good enough for being fourth best in the NFL.
Offense:
New England – Brady helped improve the offense from the prior season, finishing the regular season as the seventh best in yards gained and fourth best in scoring.
Philadelphia – Although the better passer according to the QB rating system, McNabb and the Eagles offense ranked lower than the Patriots, at ninth in yards and eighth in scoring.
Defense:
New England – Opposed to what the team’s offense did, the defense took a slight dip in productivity from the prior season finishing the year out as ninth best in yards allowed and tied for second place in points allowed.
Philadelphia – The Eagles were the team the Patriots tied for second in points allowed and they were slightly worse off in yards against, finishing 10th.
Summary:
Top ten finishes in every category, this season will go down as a tie for quarterback and defense.

2005 Season:
QB:
Ben Roethlisberger (Pittsburgh Steelers) – A controversial figure on and off the field, Roethlisberger quickly established himself as one of the premier quarterbacks in the league, finishing his second regular season as the third best quarterback with a 98.6 rating.
Matt Hasselbeck (Seattle Seahawks) – Coming within four-tenths of a point of Roethlisberger’s passer rating at 98.2, Hasselbeck ranked as the fourth best in the league.
Offense:
Pittsburgh – The Steelers offense generated under Roethlisberger’s leadership couldn’t quite match his individual statistics around the league as the unit was 15th in yards gained and ninth in scoring.
Seattle – The Seahawks offense was best in the league in 2005, ranking second in yards and first in scoring.
Defense:
Pittsburgh – Ultimately known for a smash-mouth defense, this Steelers unit did not disappoint, ranking fourth in yards allowed and tied for third in points allowed.
Seattle – Not being able to keep up with the team’s offense, the defensive side of the ball was 16th in yards and seventh in points allowed.
Summary:
On the surface this looks like a winner for the quarterbacks, both being in the top five for the season and generating good-to-great offenses, but if you look at the statistical line for Super Bowl XL you will see the winning quarterback played terribly.  Roethlisberger went 9 for 21, threw for 123 yards total, had two interceptions and one rush touchdown.  For a Super Bowl-winning performance that is dreadful and the team ultimately won because the Steelers defense was able to contain the Seahawks offense and prevent a lot of points from being scored.  By doing that the Steelers scored three times and ultimately won the game.  By Colin’s pretext, Hasselbeck and Roethlisberger should have been the deciding factors in the championship game because they were elite quarterbacks that year, but ultimately the Steelers defense held the Seahawks superior offense to 10 points and that was the difference in the two teams.  I would have to say defense won the Lombardi Trophy that year, not elite quarterbacking.

2006 Season:
QB:
Peyton Manning (Indianapolis Colts) – Manning was the best quarterback the league had to offer, finishing with a 101 rating.
Rex Grossman (Chicago Bears) – A Dr.Jekyll/Mr. Hyde season for Grossman resulted in the quarterback ranking 24th among passers with a season rating of 73.9.
Offense:
Indianapolis – Manning was an essential part in leading the offense to be the third best team in gaining yards and tied the Bears for second in scoring.
Chicago – Despite Grossman’s rollercoaster ride of a season and the 15th ranked offense in yards gained, the Bears found enough ways to score that they were tied with the Colts at second.
Defense:
Indianapolis – Like so many of Manning’s teams, the defense played poor all season long, ranking 21st in yards allowed and 23rd in points scored against.
Chicago – Holding themselves to a very high standard, the Bears finished fifth in yards against and third in points allowed.
Summary:
Like the previous year’s Big Game, it came down to an elite quarterback against a superb defense and this year the quarterback came out on top.  Therefore the quarterback will get the vote this time.  I have to be fair.

2007 Season:
QB:
Eli Manning (New York Giants) – If you recall anything from this season it is likely the helmet catch Manning, who ranked 25th among quarterbacks with a regular season passer rating of 73.9, threw to David Tyree during the winning drive in the Super Bowl.
Tom Brady (New England Patriots) – If you recall anything from this season it is likely Brady, the best quarterback in the league with a 117.2 rating, going for perfect and falling short because of a helmet catch in the Super Bowl.
Offense:
New York Giants – Not surprising since Manning was middling, the offense was middling and ranked 16th in yards gained and 14th in scoring.
New England – Setting a record for touchdown passes, Brady torched defenses, sometimes running up scores on opponents, and had the best ranked offense in numerous categories, including yards and scoring.
Defense:
New York Giants – Considering the weak offense, one would think the defense is what helped win this team a championship, however, the best it could do was come in at seventh in yards allowed and 17th in points against.
New England – Despite not really needing to do too much since Brady's offense was decimating opponents, the defense was still able to come in at fourth in yards and points against, which could have been a result of teams getting behind early and becoming one-dimensional in order to play catch-up.
Summary:
Possibly one of the most favored teams to win a championship in sports history, nobody truly gave the Giants a chance to win against the Patriots, despite a close game the two teams had played in the final week of the regular season.  Statistically the Patriots were the better team and had a championship been won it would have been because of quarterback Brady.  Since the Giants won the game and had neither a great quarterback nor defense to do it with, I can’t honestly grade this season.  I am going to have to say the championship was won because of fate, destiny, God’s will, or whatever you wish to call it.  Neither side gets the vote.

2008 Season:
QB:Ben Roethlisberger (Pittsburgh Steelers) – One of two down years for Roethlisberger, 2008 saw him as the 24th best quarterback in the regular season with an 80.1 passer rating.
Kurt Warner (Arizona Cardinals) – Continuing his Cinderella story of grocery store stocker to NFL quarterback star, Warner had a 96.9 passer rating, good enough to be the third best quarterback in the league.
Offense:
Pittsburgh – With a quarterback playing poorly, it is no surprise the offense didn’t generate much to be proud of, resulting in being 22nd in yards and 20th in scoring.
Arizona – Polar opposite to the Steelers, Warner and the Cardinals offense went on the attack and finished fourth in yards gained and tied for third in scoring.
Defense:
Pittsburgh – Coming through for Big Ben, the stereotypical Steelers defense ranked first in both yards allowed and points against.
Arizona – Again differing as much as possible to the Steelers, the Cardinals defensive unit ranked 19th in yards allowed and 28th in points allowed.
Summary:
Even though the defense nearly gave the game up in the fourth quarter and Roethlisberger was Superman-like during the winning drive to victory, I still have to give the defense credit for this year’s championship.  Had it not been for the defense the Steelers wouldn’t have even been in the Big Game and had the chance for the come-from-behind win.  While the Cardinals offense was instrumental in getting to the championship game, it was the lack of a great defense that prevented them from holding on for the win.

2009 Season:
QB:
Drew Brees (New Orleans Saints) – Not quite Brady in ’07, but certainly was a logistical nightmare for opposing defenses, Brees was the highest rated quarterback in the league with a 109.6 passer rating.
Peyton Manning (Indianapolis Colts) – Another solid season for Manning, who was sixth best with a 99.9 passer rating for the regular season.
Offense:
New Orleans – Having the best quarterback, it is no surprise the team had the best executed offense being first in yards and scoring.
Indianapolis – Not shabby in their own right, the Colts finished the regular season at ninth in yards gained and seventh in scoring.
Defense:
New Orleans – Not exactly feeding off the offenses’ talent and electricity, the Saints defense ranked 25th in yards allowed and 20th in points against.
Indianapolis – About par for the Manning-led Colts, the ordinary defense finished at 18th in yards allowed and eighth in points allowed.
Summary:
There is no question this is a quarterback wins championships year.  No debating that.

2010 Season:
QB:
Aaron Rodgers (Green Bay Packers) – Answering the question of whether he is the real deal, Rodgers was the third best passer in the league with a 101.2 rating.
Ben Roethlisberger (Pittsburgh Steelers) – Missing four games didn’t mess with Roethlisberger’s feel for the game or his connection with receivers and he finished as the fifth best quarterback, with a 97 passer rating.
Offense:
Green Bay – Despite losing a starting running back and tight end, the offense remained in the playoff hunt and finished at a respectable ninth in yards gained and 10th in points scored.
Pittsburgh – Including the four games without Roethlisberger, where the Steelers ran out quarterbacks Dennis Dixon and Charlie Batch, the offense ranked 14th in yards and 12th in scoring.
Defense:
Green Bay – If the loss of some offensive starters due to injury was tough to bear, the defensive injury hit list was soul crushing, but the team kept fighting and ultimately ranked fifth in yards given up and second in points allowed.
Pittsburgh – Not surprising the defensive unit ended the regular season as the second best in yards allowed and first in points scored against.
Summary:
After putting up outstanding numbers in 2010 and an MVP performance in Super Bowl XLV, Rodgers now has a little bit of a reason to be the cockiest player in the NFL.  Yet, he was not the sole reason for bringing a fourth Lombardi Trophy to Green Bay.  The defense certainly deserves some credit and ultimately the vote for who won the championship in 2010 is going to go to both.

After hours of exhaustive research and typing it has been determined that you need both a great defense and quarterback (in essence, the offense) to be a championship contender and winner.  Sometimes a quarterback can overcome the failings of an entire unit, and other times it is the opposite.  From 2000 to 2010, there were four votes for the defense alone winning championships, three for the quarterback alone, three for it taking both, and one no vote being tallied.
While it is close and having an elite quarterback or elite defense is going to give you a good chance at making a championship run, I would rather have 11 guys who will carry my team than one.  Should the quarterback go down for a long period of time there is little hope of salvaging the season, but if you lose one defensive player, no matter how great they are, the other 10 can step up to make up the difference.
Like many of the opinions Cowherd spews on his program that sound as if they are fact, the idea that defenses don’t win championships and elite quarterbacks do is not the end all, say all.  Sometimes one man can lead a team to ultimate victory, but in general you need every single guy on the team playing to their full potential.

Tuesday, February 08, 2011

Cavs Make History, Really Are That Bad

The Dallas Mavericks helped the Cleveland Cavaliers become an answer to a future Trivial Pursuit question in that the Lebron-less Cavs have lost 25 straight games, setting an NBA record.  The funny thing is the team broke its own record of 24 games, set in 1982.
Following the loss, Mavs Guard Jason Terry, likely trying to be kind and soften the blow to Cavaliers’ fans, stated the team’s record wasn’t a reflection of how bad they really are.  He backed up his claim with the fact that the Mavericks had several chances to put the game away but the Cavs refused to go away, ultimately losing by only three points.
While the Cavs have been competitive the last four games, keeping the final score within seven points or less, the last 36 games show nothing but failure for Ohio’s NBA fans.
Starting the season off, the Cavaliers went 7-9 proving that without Lebron James they were an average team.  However, since that time they have had only one win and their losses range from close finishes to complete meltdowns.  The following is a breakdown of the past 36 games.

Feb. 7 – at Dallas – L – 99-96
Feb. 5 – Portland – L – 111-105
Feb. 4 – at Memphis – L – 112-105
Feb. 2 – Indiana – L – 117-112
Jan. 31 – at Miami – L – 117-90
Jan. 30 – at Orland – L – 103-87
Jan. 28 – Denver – L – 117-103
Jan. 25 – at Boston – L – 112-95
Jan. 24 – at New Jersey – L – 103-101
Jan. 22 – at Chicago – L – 92-79
Jan. 21 – Milwaukee – L 102-88
Jan. 19 – Phoenix – L – 106-98
Jan. 15 – at Denver – L – 127-99
Jan. 14 – at Utah – L – 121-99
Jan. 11 – at LA Lakers – L – 112-57
Jan. 9 – at Phoenix – L – 108-100
Jan. 7 – at Golden State – L – 116-98
Jan. 5 – Toronto – L – 120-105
Jan. 2 – Dallas – L – 104-95
Jan. 1 – at Chicago – L – 100-91
Dec. 29 – at Charlotte – L – 101-92
Dec. 28 – Orlando – L – 110-95
Dec. 26 – Minnesota – L – 98-97
Dec. 22 – at Atlanta – L – 98-84
Dec. 20 – Utah – L – 101-90
Dec. 18 – New York – W – 109-102
Dec. 17 – at Indiana – L – 108-99
Dec. 15 – at Miami – L – 101-95
Dec. 12 – at Oklahoma City – L – 106-77
Dec. 11 – at Houston – L – 110-95
Dec. 8 – Chicago – L – 88-83
Dec. 7 – at Philadelphia – L – 117-97
Dec. 5 – at Detroit – L – 102-92
Dec. 4 – at Minnesota – L – 129-95
Dec. 2 – Miami – L – 118-90
Nov. 30 – Boston – L – 106-87

Among those 36 games, the Cavaliers won only one and scored 100 points or more in eight.  Of the 35 losses, they finished within 10 points in 16 games, and among those only five games ended with the Cavs losing by five points or less.  Of the other 19 losses that saw a point differential of 11 or more, the worst loss was by 55 points to the Lakers on Jan. 11.  Another seven games were lost by 20 points or more.
The Cleveland Cavaliers are just not being competitive and I truly feel sorry for that team now that Lebron has left.  Truly it should be the fans we feel sorry for, who are being spared to death not only by the Cavs, who have only been to the NBA Finals once in their entire history where they were swept in four games by the San Antonio Spurs, but by every sports franchise the city has to offer.  Since 1964, when the Cleveland Browns won an NFL Championship, a title has never been achieved in any major sporting arena.