Barstool Debate: Should the Packers trade for Marshawn Lynch?
Posted by John Paulsen (10/01/2010 @ 12:15 pm)
Adam Schefter is the latest pundit to chime in on the Marshawn Lynch-to-the-Packers rumors.
Green Bay has to do something at running back, and I think the organization recognizes it. It knows it can’t rely on Brandon Jackson as its workhorse from now through the playoffs, assuming it makes them. Green Bay will continue looking for a trade, and Lynch makes as much sense as anybody. But the problem is, teams have been trying to pry away Lynch since the off-season and so far, Buffalo hasn’t budged.
This has been something of a hot topic of late, so I thought I’d enlist the help of our NFL guru, Anthony Stalter, and try to come to some sort of conclusion about whether or not the Packers should trade for Lynch.
JP: Anthony, these rumors have been out there for a while, and given Buffalo’s situation (sucky) and the fact that they have three pretty good running backs, it makes a lot of sense that they would move him for a draft pick to help their rebuilding process. Lynch is 24 years old, has a career 4.0 ypc, decent hands out of the backfield and has had several run-ins (hit and run, misdemeanor gun charge) with the police. Given the fact that the Broncos gave up a 4th rounder for Laurence Maroney, what type of draft pick is Lynch worth in your opinion?
Read the rest of this entry »
Better off (with): Donovan McNabb or Michael Vick?
Posted by Anthony Stalter (10/01/2010 @ 11:11 am)
When you get right down to it, neither Donovan McNabb nor Michael Vick are in a bad place right now.
McNabb certainly isn’t in the prime of his career, but at 33 he doesn’t have one foot in the proverbial NFL grave either. He’s working under a man in Mike Shanahan that has won three Super Bowls (two as a head coach, one as an offensive coordinator) and multiple conference championships, and is ready to face his old team this Sunday at his old stomping grounds.
He’s also out of Philadelphia, where he couldn’t wake up in the morning without being booed for the way he poured his cereal. He’s now playing for a fan base that appreciates what he brings to the table because they realize what it’s like not to have a leader at the quarterback position. (No offense to Jason Campbell, who is an extremely hard worker and a likable guy, but considering Bruce Gradkowski is now starting over him in Oakland it’s apparent that he doesn’t have what it takes to be a quality starting quarterback in this league.)
Vick has it good, too. After dazzling Andy Reid in the first two weeks of the season, he was named the full-time starter and he did well not to muck up the first opportunity he had to thank his head coach by lighting up the Jaguars last Sunday. Vick has been as good as any quarterback in the league this year, throwing for 750 yards and six touchdowns while compiling a QB rating of 110.2. He’s also rushed for 170 yards on 23 carries and best of all, he hasn’t turned the ball over despite fumbling twice.
The Eagles are now Vick’s team and while he has yet to face a quality defense, the tape doesn’t lie: he’s been phenomenal so far. Whether or not his great play continues is uncertain, but as of right now there’s nothing negative anyone can say about Vick’s game.
Read the rest of this entry »
Sports Illustrated lists its Top 20 all-time sportscasters
Posted by Mike Farley (05/15/2010 @ 8:00 am)

Sports Illustrated put out this list of what it believes to be the Top 20 all-time sportscasters. Some of these guys are before my time, but unfortunately, most of them are not. Anyway, here is the list and a snappy comment or two, as well as who they missed and who I’m glad is not on here:
1. Jim McKay—The Bob Costas of his time. McKay hosted ABC’s “Wide World of Sports” as well as The Olympics. It’s hard to argue with putting him on top here, but it’s also easy to argue for a few of these others to be #1.
2. Vin Scully—If I hear ol’ Vin doing a game on TV, and with the MLB package it’s nice to still hear him doing Dodgers’ games, I don’t care who is playing….I stop and watch, and listen. It’s just comforting to hear the guy’s voice, which was made for broadcasting baseball.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in: Barstool Debates, Television
Tags: Al Michaels, baseball, Basketball, Bob Costas, Bob Murphy, Bob Papa, Boxing, CBS, Chicago Cubs, Chick Hearn, Chris Schenkel, College Football, Curt Gowdy, Dennis Eckersley, Detroit Tigers, Dick Enberg, Don Dunphy, Don Meredith, Ernie Harwell, football, Frank Gifford, Gary Cohen, Gary Thorn, Gus Johnson, Harry Caray, Hockey, Howard Cosell, Jack Brickhouse, Jack Buck, Jack Whitaker, Jim McKay, Jim Nantz, Joe Buck, Joe Garagiola, John Madden, Keith Jackson, Kirk Gibson, Lindsey Nelson, Los Angeles Dodgers, Los Angeles Lakers, Marv Albert, Mel Allen, Mike Emrick, Miracle on Ice, Monday Night Football, New York Giants, New York Yankees, NFL Network, Olympics, PBA bowling, Phil Rizzuto, Ralph Kiner, Red Barber, SNY, Sports Illustrated, This Week in Baseball, Tony Kubek, top sportscasters, top sportscasters of all-time, Vin Scully, WGN, Wide World of Sports
Should fans be Tasered if they run onto the field?
Posted by Anthony Stalter (05/04/2010 @ 11:15 am)
In my 20-plus years of watching sports, I’ve never had the desire to run onto the field during an event. In fact, I don’t even find the humor in it. It’s annoying and therefore, I’m all for police officers taking the necessary measures to get the idiots off the field.
Steve Consalvi, some goofy 17-year-old who attended the Cardinals-Phillies game in Philadelphia on Monday night, decided that it was a once in a lifetime opportunity to run onto the field at Citizens Bank Park. So he did. And he was Tasered. And apparently the stun dropped him like a sack of potatoes, prompting several Phillies players to hold their gloves up to their faces in order to mask their own laughter.
Now, the police department is investigating the matter and discussing whether or not using the stun gun was appropriate.
Personally, if it’s necessary, then I’m all for it. If someone runs onto the field during a sporting event, what usually happens? He or she gets tackled, right? So what’s the difference between taking someone down with the use of bodily force, or taking someone down with a stun gun? The end result is still the same – the asswipe is going down.
Read the rest of this entry »
Poll: Which quarterback will have the most success in the NFL?
Posted by Anthony Stalter (05/03/2010 @ 4:00 pm)

When we polled readers on which quarterback they think will wind up having the most success in the NFL, the one name I didn’t expect to receive the majority of the votes was Tim Tebow.
I’ve been vocal with my opinion on the Broncos’ decision to trade three draft picks for Tebow in the first round of last month’s draft. First and foremost, I think Tebow is a massive project and to give up three picks (a second, a third and a fourth) in order to trade back into the first round and select him wasn’t wise on Denver’s part. (Especially after they traded for Brady Quinn in the offseason and still have an unspectacular, but effective Kyle Orton on the roster.)
But regardless of whether or not you liked the trade for the Broncos, Tebow is remains the biggest boom or bust quarterback in the 2010 draft class. He is extremely coachable and works very hard on his craft, but he will likely need years of schooling before he can become a NFL quarterback. He still has a long way to go with his mechanics and he’s behind the 8-ball because he didn’t play in a pro style offense at Florida. Athletically he’s ready to play now, but there have already been a handful of scouts, coaches and GMs that have said in so many words that they wouldn’t stake their careers on him being a quarterback.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in: Barstool Debates, NFL
Tags: 2010 NFL Draft, Anthony Stalter, Best 2010 NFL Draft quarterback, Colt McCoy, Headlines, Jimmy Clausen, Kyle Orton, Sam Bradford, Steve Smith, Tim Tebow, Tim Tebow Broncos, Tim Tebow vs. Sam Bradford
Correcting Bill Simmons, Part 6: Bill’s not-so-great NFL overtime idea
Posted by John Paulsen (02/09/2010 @ 4:30 pm)
In his retro-diary of the second half of Super Bowl XLIV, Bill Simmons explains his seemingly infallible NFL overtime idea.
9:25: Two straight first-down throws. Suddenly we’re on the Saints’ 36. I remember thinking, “Great, they’ll tie it, then whichever teams wins the coin toss will march down and score, and we’ll have to hear about how to fix overtime for the next nine months. Shoot me.”
(FYI: I know how to fix it. Win the toss and score a touchdown, game over. Make a field goal on the opening drive and the opponent gets one possession of its own. From there, sudden death rules. Find a hole in that idea. You can’t.)
Um, yes I can. Doesn’t his idea have the same problem as current system? The team that wins the toss still has the advantage. If Team A drives down and kicks a field goal, and Team B kicks its own field goal to tie the game, and now the game is decided by sudden death, doesn’t the team that gets the ball first (Team A) still have the advantage?
Sure, if Team A kicks a field goal, Team B has an opportunity to win the game with a touchdown, but they still are at a disadvantage if the game is tied after each team gets a possession. This isn’t fair, seeing as both teams were equally effective on their first overtime drive.
I like the blind bid idea. On a note card, each coach writes down the yard line at which he’s willing to take the ball, and whichever team that is willing to take the ball closest to its own goal line gets possession. Each team has an equal opportunity at possession and there is strategy involved. Do you have more faith in your offense or your defense? Would you rather take possession at your own 15-yard line or give the ball to to the other team at the 18-yard line?
It’s fair and fun.
Will the Saints become a dynasty?
Posted by Anthony Stalter (02/08/2010 @ 4:18 pm)
I know what you’re thinking: Great, the Saints win one Super Bowl and now the media wants to anoint them the Steelers of the 70s, the 49ers of the 80s or the Cowboys of the early 90s.
Relax – I’m not doing that. But I bring the topic up because there’s a case to be made that the Saints have all the pieces in place to become a mini-dynasty this decade.
Over the next couple weeks, the Saints will ensure that centerpiece Drew Brees finishes his career in New Orleans by giving him a very large contract extension. Whenever the time is right, they’ll also do the same with head coach Sean Payton and make sure that defensive coordinator Gregg Williams is happy where he’s at in order to keep their two playcallers intact for years to come as well.
With those three vital pieces in place, the Saints could challenge for multiple Super Bowls and not be a one-year wonder. Continuity breeds success and considering they have a family-like atmosphere in their locker room, the team won’t have a hard sell on its hands in trying to bring free agents like Darren Sharper back to New Orleans next season.
But as I’ve highlighted below (after the jump), they do have some huge hurdles to overcome if they want to build upon their success from the 2009-2010 season.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in: Barstool Debates, NFL, Super Bowl
Tags: 2010 Super Bowl, Can the Saints become a dynasty?, Drew Brees, Drew Brees contract extension, Gregg Williams, Indianapolis Colts, New Orleans Saints, Saints beat Colts in Super Bowl, Saints dynasty, Sean Payton, Super Bowl XLIV, Super Bowl XLIV recap
Is Martz a good fit for Cutler and the Bears?
Posted by Anthony Stalter (02/01/2010 @ 4:25 pm)
The “Mad Scientist” is coming to Chicago: The National Football Post reports that the Bears have hired Mike Martz to become their next offensive coordinator.
What’s interesting about this hire is that Martz wasn’t GM Jerry Angelo’s first, second, third or even fourth candidate for the position. Angelo had Jeremy Bates, Rob Chudzinski, Hue Jackson and a host of others ahead of Martz on his wish list, but all of the candidates bowed out, presumably because head coach Lovie Smith is on the hot seat. Why would anyone want to go to Chicago if there’s a possibility that they’ll get axed in a year anyway?
Why would anyone outside of Martz, that is.
After serving as the 49ers’ offensive coordinator for just one season, Martz was out of football last year and was itching to get back into coaching. With so few options, it makes sense that he would jump at the opportunity to join the Bears.
They’re desperate, he’s desperate – it works.
But will it work? Martz was the same person that criticized Jay Cutler earlier this season for being immature following a loss to the Packers in Week 1. Martz reportedly got the Bears’ blessing to fly down to Tennessee over the weekend to meet with Cutler and clear the air, but will the marriage work?
Martz is still regarded as one of the brightest offensive minds in football and his track record speaks for itself. Anyone that can turn the Lions’ offense into a top 10 passing attack deserves praise, although the reason why he has been ousted everywhere he’s been is because he doesn’t run the football. He also has no use for pass protection and his quarterbacks are often sitting ducks because he always runs plays out of three and four receiver sets, thus leaving less linemen in to protect his signal caller. That’s not good considering how bad the Bears’ offensive line is and given that Cutler often forces passes when he’s under duress and doesn’t mind throwing as many interceptions as humanly possible during 60 minutes of football.
I see this union between Cutler and Martz ending in one of two ways: An explosive partnership that makes the Bears one of the most excited passing teams in the NFL, or a beautiful disaster that will be worthy of watching from the front row.
Either way, it should be a fun year in Chicago.
Was Martz a good hire for the Bears?
Photo from fOTOGLIF
If Favre retires, was signing worth it for Vikings?
Posted by Anthony Stalter (01/25/2010 @ 12:09 pm)
Before their win over the Cowboys in the Divisional Round two weeks ago, I proposed the question of whether or not signing Brett Favre was worth it for the Vikings. Now that Minnesota has been knocked out of the playoffs and the annual Brett Favre retirement dance has begun, I’m proposing a similar question.
If Favre does decide to hang ‘em up this offseason, was signing him for one year worth it for the Vikings?
Had they lost to Dallas, I would have empathically said “no” to the above question. The Vikings won the division and reached the playoffs with Gus Frerotte and Tarvaris Jackson in 2008. So for all intents and purposes, had they lost to the Cowboys the Vikings would not have improved under Favre and therefore, his signing would have been a waste. After all, Minnesota didn’t jump over all the hurdles to sign Favre last offseason just so they could win another division title and be bounced in their first playoff game. And had he retired after a loss to Dallas, the signing would have looked even worse.
However, my stance has changed after the Vikes advanced to the NFC Championship Game because that meant they did improve with Favre under center. They weren’t knocking on the door of a Super Bowl last year with Jackson at quarterback and although we’ll never know, I highly doubt they would have reached the NFC title game with Jackson or Sage Rosenfels this season.
So yeah, the signing of Favre was worth it in my eyes. Did they sign him in hopes that he would advance them to the Super Bowl? Of course they did, but 30 teams fail to reach the Super Bowl every year and 28 of them didn’t get as far as the Vikings did this season. They knew they were a quarterback away from making a legitimate run and they did what they had to do in order to sign one of the best in the game.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in: Barstool Debates, NFL
Tags: 2010 NFL Championship Weekend, Anthony Stalter, Brad Childress, Brett Favre, Brett Favre retirement, Brett Favre retires, Brett Favre Vikings, Brett Favre Vikings Super Bowl, Brett Favre waste signing, Headlines, Minnesota Vikings Super Bowl, Sage Rosenfels, Tarvaris Jackson, Vikings sign Brett Favre
Should the Cardinals trade Anquan Boldin?
Posted by Anthony Stalter (01/22/2010 @ 12:50 pm)
If beat writer Kent Somers of the Arizona Republic is right when he says that the Cardinals will try to shop receiver Anquan Boldin this offseason, then the team would be making a wise decision.
Boldin is a quality playmaker with excellent size, good speed and solid hands. But talent isn’t something the Cardinals are desperate for at the wideout position. They have plenty of youth and depth at receiver with Larry Fitzgerald, Steve Breaston and Early Doucet, which makes Boldin expendable.
Boldin will be 30 in early October and is set to make $3 million in his final year. Mind you, that’s not a ton of money to pay a receiver of his caliber, but if he reaches free agency after the 2010 season then Arizona will get nothing for him in return. If they trade him now, they might be able to get a third round pick and another player, which was what teams were offering last offseason.
A trade makes even more sense if Kurt Warner retires this offseason. When Matt Leinart takes over under center, the Cardinals will switch from an offense that attacks opponents through the air to one that tries to beat teams on the ground. The focus will come off the quarterback and receivers and onto young running back Beanie Wells.
Read the rest of this entry »
Posted in: Barstool Debates, NFL
Tags: Anquan Boldin, Anquan Boldin trade, Anquan Boldin trade rumors, Arizona Cardinals, Arizona Cardinals rumors, Early Doucet, Kurt Warner, Kurt Warner retire, Larry Fitzgerald, Steve Breaston
|