NFL.com ranked the Top 10 Feuds in NFL history, complete with video clips that unfortunately we cannot embed because the site doesn’t like to share. Still though, there are some great clips so head over to the site to check it out.
7. Steve Young vs. Joe Montana Two ultra-competitive, future Hall-of-Fame quarterbacks on the same roster made for uneasy situation in San Francisco. Watch clip
3. Buddy Ryan vs. Mike Ditka Buddy Ryan became the first coordinator to be carried off the field at the Super Bowl, then he left to coach the Eagles. Watch Clip
1. Raiders vs. The World The Oakland, then Los Angeles, and back to Oakland Raiders have always fancied itself as a rebelious team that goes against convention. Watch clip
The Buddy Ryan vs. Mike Ditka video is absolutely outstanding. There’s a part in the clip when players are talking about Ryan and Ditka getting into a shoving match one time and Ditka said of the incident, “Funny, I’ve never got a Christmas card from him after that.” Classic Ditka.
Former Pittsburgh Steelers’ linebacker Joey Porter thinks there should be an asterisk placed on the Patriots’ Super Bowl seasons.
“They [the Patriots] cheated, there should be an asterisk. They cheated and they got caught,” the All-Pro linebacker, who spent eight seasons with the Pittsburgh Steelers before joining Miami in free agency last season, said in an interview on “NFL Live.”
“Why, if you have nothing to hide, would you destroy [the evidence]? That’s how I’ve looked at it from the beginning. Why destroy something that doesn’t have to be destroyed? Let everyone know what was on the tapes. Why would you destroy them so fast?”
“They went from zero to 60 overnight and [Belichick] went from a good coach to a great great coach and he got caught cheating,” Porter said on “NFL Live.”
I love when players and coaches break out the asterisk comments. There will never be any asterisks in sports record books. The asterisks come into play by us fans getting upset and never forgetting how the Patriots cheated or how Barry Bonds used steroids to break the all-time home run record. Fans talking about those situations and choosing not to acknowledge that they happened is the asterisks.
Welcome to the second part of my infinite-part series, Correcting Bill Simmons. To find out why I started this series, feel free to read the first part. Simply stated – Bill Simmons is an entertaining writer, but sometimes he goes off the reservation and says something absurd.
This week, in his Ramblings column, he defends his Patriots over the whole Spygate fiasco.
If you have a national column in which you’re excoriating a sports team for cheating even though it already paid a severe penalty for what it did, and you’re hinting more revelations are coming down the road, and then it’s proven you were barking up the wrong tree … you need to admit defeat and quit blowing the situation out of proportion. No, really.
What gets me is that he thinks that the Patriots “already paid a severe penalty” for what they did. This is why Boston fans annoy me. Let’s see, the Patriots were caught videotaping the Jets sideline in a game last season and Matt Walsh produced more videotapes from 2000-2003, so it’s pretty clear to anyone that’s objective about the situation that the team has been videotaping their opponents’ sidelines during Bill Belichick’s entire run. And the “severe penalty” is losing a single first round pick and paying a fine? Is he serious?
If you took a poll of all NFL fans, I think the overwhelming majority would say that the Pats got off with a slap on the wrist. Their “punishment” was a joke considering that they knowingly broke the rules by stealing signals for at least seven years. If this were the Giants, Boston fans would be foaming at the mouth, bitching and complaining that the penalty wasn’t stiff enough.
Bill, take the Patriot Glasses off for a minute and look at this situation objectively.
CBS Radio in Baltimore is reporting that the Miami defensive end Jason Taylor wants to be a Raven and it’s a legitimate possibility he could be very soon. Apparently the Dolphins and Ravens are already in discussions about a trade.
I believe that the Ravens are seriously in the mix for Jason Taylor and look for the deal to be structured as follows: Miami gets a (2009) 3rd round draft pick with the pot possibly being sweetened to a 2nd round pick; the Ravens get Jason Taylor; Taylor signs a 2-3 year contract extension that is cap friendly for the Ravens.
If this trade happens, look for news to break that Cam Cameron and a number of current/ former Ravens players helped to sway Taylor towards Baltimore. Also, look for Taylor to play the pure rush-end position which will give the Ravens insurance against any downtime for an aging Trevor Pryce also giving them continued flexibility in how they use Terrell Suggs. Also, look for the Ravens to play more of a pure 4/3 if they can land Taylor – in a 4/3 base look for the box to have (DE) Pryce (DT) Ngata (DT) Gregg (DE) Taylor with (MLB) Lewis, (SAM) Scott, (WIL) Suggs/Johnson…etc.
The source seems a little shaky, so take it for what it’s worth. But obviously the Dolphins are interested in dealing Taylor, so this isn’t a far-fetched rumor.
Granted, they’re not as important as the Lincoln-Douglas debates, but as long as there have been barstools, there have been men sitting on those stools arguing about sports. This week, John Paulsen and Anthony Stalter sit at a virtual bar and debate what life would be like if the NFL didn’t have a salary cap. Take a seat, order a beverage and feel free to give us your two cents.
Anthony: With the NFL threatening to have an uncapped year following the 2009 season, the first thing most fans want to do is panic. Who wants a situation in the NFL with haves and have-nots like they do in baseball? Well, the fact of the matter is that small market teams can still survive and MLB has proved that. Small market teams (i.e. teams that don’t spend big in order to win) like the 2007 Rockies and 2003 Marlins are prime examples that winning is accomplished on the field and not with a big budget.
John: I’m glad you brought up the Marlins. It’s true that a small-market/low-budget team can succeed for a year or two with a great farm system and good scouting, but what happens to those small market World Series teams the following year? Or the year after that? They either sell of their parts because they can’t afford to keep them or they are raided by the big market teams, who are looking to simply buy themselves a championship. In the four seasons since the Marlins’ 2003 World Series win, they haven’t finished higher than third in their division. It’s true that they can be competitive for a year or two, but they can’t sustain their excellence like the big market teams can. And that’s simply not fair.
Anthony: But at least these teams can still be competitive. Some fans assume that just because a team doesn’t spend a lot, it means that team is destined to finish in the cellar every year. And besides, it’s up to the owners whether or not to spend. We can assume that there’s going to be a huge gap in terms of budget between a team like the Cowboys (we know owner Jerry Jones will spend to win) and maybe a smaller market team like the Seahawks, but we simply don’t know what owners are going to be willing to spend. In other words, we don’t know if the NFL would turn into MLB if the league went without a cap. It sounds like a crazy thought now, but maybe not having a cap will drive the competition even more because owners in the lower market cities will still be willing to spend to win. (Unlike how it is in baseball, where clubs like the Marlins, Royals and Pirates simply don’t want to spend.)
John: It’s definitely possible for a small budget team to make a run here and there, but think what it must be like to be an American League team competing with the payrolls of the Yankees and Red Sox. Since MLB expanded its playoffs in 1995, the Yankees have made the postseason every single season, essentially gobbling up one of the four AL playoff spots each year. Now that the Red Sox started to catch up in payroll, they have made the postseason four of the last five years. So if you’re an AL team other than the Yankees or Red Sox, you’re basically competing for the two other division titles because the AL East and Wild Card berths are pretty much decided going into the season. Then imagine being a fan of the Devil Rays, Orioles or the Blue Jays, who are also in the AL East. Why even bother? In the NFL, the small market teams are already at a disadvantage when it comes to generating stadium revenue and attracting free agents. Removing the salary cap will only serve to eliminate the one thing keeping a competitive balance in the NFL. It’s parity that makes the league so popular, because most fans know that if their favorite team catches a few breaks, they’ve got a good shot to make the postseason. It’s no coincidence that the league exploded in popularity at the same time the salary cap was implemented.
Anthony: I actually agree 100%, John. I love how parity has made the NFL ultra competitive, but it’s interesting to play devil’s advocate regarding this topic. While I don’t think an uncapped year in the NFL would be a total disaster, I would much rather see things continue the way they are and preserve the balance in the league. How great is it that your favorite team has a shot to win every year if they can have a solid draft and make wise free agent pickups? It’s fun for fans.
