As my lead-in for The Best Championship Sunday Picks in the World, I’m going to take a quick look back at some notes I made following last week’s action. I had planned on doing a divisional wrap-up column this week, but my work schedule, some other personal matters, and my affinity for naps when the weather is cold left me precious little time. So, just what was I thinking following the games last weekend?

·         Some may wonder whether I stand firmly behind my picks when I make them, especially on a weekend when I go 1-3 (Thank you, Tom Brady… the NFL thanks you too—more on that later). Well, let me put it this way: I never regret my picks. One of the reasons I love the NFL is that the games are not played on paper, and there are so many unforeseeable intangibles, that the games always hold some kind of excitement due to the many scenarios that can unfold. That’s why a team that looks as unbeatable as the Pats do right now can get beaten by a team like the Arizona Cardinals. Or, to put my faith in my picks another way, I missed out on a $137.00 parlay because the Packers failed to cover against the 49ers (that’s right, I live in Canada, haven of legal sports betting).

·         Elvis Dumerville and Von Miller: Where were you guys? You came up really small in a really big game where one big play on defence could have made the difference.

·         I was a little surprised when the Broncos decided to play it conservatively at the end of the 1st half and not attempt to score, but when they got the ball back at the end of the 4th with 2 timeouts left and a chance to win the game, and I was excited to see some Manning magic, I was speechless when they chose to kneel and go to OT.

·         I couldn’t help wondering, as I watched Manning throw the ball without much zip, whether he regretted choosing a cold-weather team like Denver. One of the hallmarks of his successful Indianapolis teams was that, due to them playing in the AFC South, and having their home games in a dome, they never had to play many cold-weather games. That was before Manning’s neck surgeries. In Indy, home field advantage was a big deal, as it kept Manning from playing road games in ungodly-cold places like Foxborough and Heinz Field. In Denver, home field turned out to be a disadvantage.

·         That tableau during the coin toss: talk about a picture being worth a thousand words. There’s Manning, head down, looking absolutely miserable, while Ray Lewis, head held high, is muttering what I can only guess is some sort of prayer. I was ready to call the game for the Ravens right there.

·         Aaron Rodgers played a good game, not great, but good enough to win, against a really tough defence. As I was watching him try to buy time and find open receivers, this was my overriding thought: Tom Brady has Aaron Hernandez (and occasionally, Rob Gronkowski); Matt Ryan has Tony Gonzalez; Colin Kaepernick has Vernon Davis; Joe Flacco has Dennis Pitta; Tony Romo has Jason Whitten; Drew Brees has Jimmy Graham, and; Phillip Rivers has Antonio Gates. Aaron Rodgers, the best QB in the NFL, is stuck with an under-achieving, butterfingered whiner like Jermichael Finley. I hope the Pack upgrades the TE position in the offseason.

·         I thought that Green Bay’s defence seemed woefully unprepared for the eventuality that Kaepernick might run the ball effectively, which is one of the upgrades in the ‘niners’ offence since the switch from Alex Smith at QB. Then I read that, according to Charles Woodson, who I had expected to have a huge role in limiting Kaepernick’s effectiveness, the Packers’ defence weren’t prepared to stop the San Fran QB’s running. Stunning.

·         Between Woodson’s assessment of his own team’s lack of preparedness, and the Broncos’ inability to stop the brilliant Baltimore offensive strategy of “let Joe Flacco drop back and throw the ball as far as he can,” I’d have fired both Green Bay’s and Denver’s Defensive Coordinators .

·         Say what you want about the Seahawks-Falcons game, but the real disappointment for me was in the fact that Pete Carroll and his coaching staff cost his team a victory they earned through superior effort. First, Seattle got put in a hole due to some highly questionable play-calling on a couple of red zone trips in the 1st half. Then, there’s Carroll’s abject failure to understand basic psychology at the end of the 4th. OK, so let me get this straight: You're playing against a team that has a history of choking in the playoffs. You've just come back from being down 20 points, twice, to take a 1 point lead with 31 seconds left in the game. You've watched as your opponent has failed to be able to move the ball when it counts after being able to move it well during most of the game, while their defence all of a sudden can't stop you. Your opponent, the one with a history of choking, playing in front of a stadium full of nervous fans who have watched them choke again and again in big games, is choking again in a big game. You have now forced this team into a situation where they have to try a last-ditch, win-or-lose, 49-yard field goal. As a coach, you think that the best strategy is to give the obviously nervous opposing kicker a practice kick? Mind-boggling.

·         I love seeing LB Rob Ninkovich, special-teams player made good, playing such a key role for the Pats. He’s one of those “big plays when it counts” type of players that led the Pats to three Super Bowl wins in four years, like Mike Vrabel. When I heard it mentioned during last week’s telecast that Ninkovich used to play TE, I couldn’t help envisioning him catching a TD pass in the Super Bowl.

·         Speaking of the Super Bowl, on a weekend where the playoffs lost both Aaron Rodgers and Peyton Manning, the NFL must be relieved that Tom Brady is still around. A Patriots-49ers Super Bowl is probably the game the league is hoping for right now.

·         Aqib Talib: another Belichick windfall. He’s an extremely talented player, big, athletic, and physical enough to cover any team’s best receiver. Talib loves playing for the Pats; being around so many quality, character players, and in an environment where winning is an attitude, he probably feels like he’s been rescued from himself.

·         Lots of Pats fans mourning the loss of Gronkowski for the rest of the playoffs. I say it’s a blessing. It’s time for the Pats to seriously think about moving on, without Gronkowski. Healthy, he’s the best TE in football. However, he’s the porcelain TE, like fine China; valuable, breaks too easily, and once broken, is useless. Or, as my wife, a huge Pats fan (who can’t stand Gronkowski because of his fragility) says, “He’s like that person you work with who’s sick all the time, so everyone else ends up picking up the slack.”

·         No tears for Pats fans, please. Brady still has Welker, Hernandez, Woodhead, Ridley, Vereen, Branch, and Lloyd. They’ll be better than fine.

·         And speaking of Brandon Lloyd, I am sick of hearing about what a disappointment he’s been this season. Anyone who thinks that either doesn’t watch the games (I do), relies too much on statistics (I don’t), or listens to too many talking heads on TV or too much talk radio (please). All season, Lloyd has been there, working hard, making highlight-reel sideline catches, and being a team player. He’s always a threat to beat you deep, which allows Brady more leeway to work the ball underneath, sideline, cross, seam, etc., plus Lloyd helps open up more space for the Pats’ resurgent running game. Tell me this, Pats fans: would you rather have a guy who whines because he doesn’t get the ball enough (there are lots of those in the league)?

·         More Lloyd: What exactly was the deal with that flag for tossing the ball to the official too hard? No more playoff games for you, zebra. You’re much too sensitive.

Before I get to my picks, I would be remiss if I didn’t take the opportunity to call out, yet again, my favourite target, Peter King of Sports Illustrated. King has always curried favour with the league and its players. He has also devolved into a bully who takes potshots at the weak while ignoring his cronies and buddies. Case in point: In his December 31st MMQB, when discussing Vikings coach Leslie Frazier’s approach to Adrian Peterson’s pursuit of the single-season rushing record, King took a shot at basketball player Nykesha Sales, referencing her as an example of a record that was achieved under dubious circumstances. He did this in a week where more than one NFL defender had a legitimate chance of breaking the single-season sack record, which was achieved when King favourite Brett Favre took a dive to allow Michael Strahan to get the record-breaking sack.

The bogus way in which the sack record was set, it being an NFL record, was the obvious and relevant example to use here, yet King chose to malign a female hoops star who, by all accounts, has never harmed anyone. Now, this would be fine, except that King, who was allowed ample access to Favre during his playing career by the player himself, can’t seem to go more than a couple of weeks without mentioning his old pal. Don’t believe me? In last week’s MMQB, King mentions the retired Favre twice, including writing about a text message that Favre sent to Ryan Longwell, who had just been signed by the Seahawks due to an injury to their kicker (I sincerely hope that Favre refrained from including a dick-pic… old habits die hard, after all). I called King on his cheap shot at Sales on his Twitter. I told him he had a lot of nerve, that he was still kissing Favre’s butt, and that he was a bully. He did not respond. I despise Peter King. A once competent football writer, he has morphed into a media personality, doing televised spots on NBC Sunday night telecasts, and promoting fellow NBC employees like former independent-turned sellout Mike Florio at ProFootballTalk. You should check out King’s MMQB Tuesday Edition, where he answers cherry-picked reader e-mails. It’s pathetic.

Well, how’s that for an intro? Now that I’ve gotten that off my chest, let’s get down to business.

49ers at Falcons

First, I have to talk about the very recent controversy surrounding top 49ers’ receiver Michael Crabtree, who was questioned by San Francisco’s Special Victims’ Unit regarding an allegation of sexual assault last week. According to reports, Crabtree is with his team in Atlanta, and, having not been charged, faces no sanction by the league. I did come across this quote, by ‘niners’ Safety Donte Whitner, which piqued my interest:

(Coach Harbaugh) said that we can do anything in the world and we can come and talk to him and he’ll forgive us except put our hands on women. If you put your hand on a woman then you’re done in his book. So other than putting your hands on women, you can do anything and come talk to him, and it’s true. Open-door policy. Everybody around here really likes him and we want to win for him and for ourselves.

So, here I am, ready to pick the 49ers, by a comfortable margin, and this happens. Is it a big deal? I honestly don’t know. Harbaugh wants to win. Crabtree is a huge part of what the 49ers want to do on offence. Does he play? How much? What’s his mentality going into the game? How do his teammates look at him? So many questions.

This is how I see the game.

The Falcons are a different team on offence this season. WR Julio Jones has made a huge impact. Jones, playing opposite the immensely talented Roddy White, with ageless wonder Tony Gonzalez at TE, has made this Falcons offence much more dangerous than in past seasons. The 49ers counter with a well-balanced defence, capable of rushing the passer, with the LB depth to prevent huge running plays, and talented and hard-hitting Safeties to shore up both the run and pass defence. That’s a great matchup. I anticipated the 49ers utilizing TE Vernon Davis to great effect; he has been an afterthought on offence since Kaepernick took over at QB, and Davis’s athleticism will be a strength against the Falcons. Without a doubt, Atlanta will be prepared for Kaepernick’s running. The Falcons also have some dangerous ball-hawks in the secondary. This game has the potential to be much closer than I had initially anticipated. The effect of each of the teams’ previous games is a wash, psychologically. The Falcons won a highly emotional game against the Seahawks, pulling out the game in dramatic fashion, and supplying Matt Ryan, and amazingly Tony Gonzalez, with their first-ever playoff victory. The expected letdown from such a game is equaled in effect by the ease with which the 49ers dispatched the Packers, because easy wins have a tendency to soften a team’s resolve. In cases such as both of these teams face, focus is the key to recovery. The Falcons are on a mission, seeking respect, underdogs at home. The 49ers have had this unexpected distraction introduced into their preparations. I can’t believe I’m doing this, but, with so many unanswered questions, I have to go with my gut. Winner: Falcons

Ravens at Patriots

No surprises here, thank goodness. I promise you, the Pats are relieved that Gronkowski is a non-factor; he was in the lineup last week, got hurt, and the offence barely missed a beat. This week, the Pats can gameplan without thinking about Gronkowski at all. And believe me, they are not short of options for Tom Brady. The Ravens will key on Wes Welker, and rightfully so, but he’s impossible to cover with one player; he requires help when he runs those short, sharp routes. So, either the Ravens do what it takes to stop Welker, and they allow Brady free reign to hit one of his myriad other options, or they let Welker kill them slowly. The Ravens will play hard on defence, inspired by their leader Ray Lewis, but they just don’t have the personnel to stop the many-headed Patriots attack. On offence, the Ravens have Ray Rice, and that’s significant. The Pats will bottle Rice up, keep him from getting big gains. Meanwhile, the New England secondary, much more flexible since the acquisition of Aqib Talib, will work to prevent the types of big gains in the passing game that doomed the Broncos last week. On both sides of the ball, this is not a good matchup for Baltimore. Winner: Patriots

This is a story about Lance Armstrong, and it is absolutely true.

There's this young man I know. Just a teenager, seventeen-years-old. A few weeks ago, he was telling me about what he wants to do when he finishes high school. He wants to get involved in a competitive sport. He has already been training for a while now. He's a smart kid. Focused. Serious. He has definite goals, and he has definite ideas about how he's going to achieve them.

He talked to me about the lengths to which he would have to go, the sacrifices he would have to make, in order to get where he wants to achieve his goals. At just 17, he already has what appears to me to be an encyclopedic knowledge of performance enhancing drugs, PEDs. He talked at great lengths about things that I didn't understand, things like "loads" and "cycling on and off." He used terminology that I didn't understand at all, had never heard before, and can't remember. It was like he was speaking another language, one in which he was quite fluent.

Since I couldn't discuss the subject on his level, I asked questions from a perspective that I could understand. I asked him if it would be satisfying to be successful knowing that he had used PEDs. He replied that anyone who succeeded in his chosen sport had to use PEDs, and that because everyone used them it wasn't really cheating. I asked him about the potential health risks. He replied that the people who develop health problems, as well as the ones who get caught, are the ones who don't know what they are doing, and that he would never be like that. I wanted to know how he would feel if, later on in life, he found out that taking PEDs had wrecked his body and shortened his life. He told me that if he were to achieve the type of success that he hopes to achieve, it would all be worth it.

This young man, barely 17, serious, intelligent, focused, told me that he hadn't used any PEDs yet, but that he knew that he would. There was no question in his look, in his tone. It was just the way that it had to be. He didn't even seem resigned to the fact. He had a goal, and PEDs were merely a necessary step towards achieving that goal. I can tell you, honestly, knowing this kid, listening to him speak, that it didn't bother him at all.

I've heard a lot of talk this week about Lance Armstrong and the worst-kept secret in sports, that he cheated. A lot of what I have heard centers around balancing out the harm he has done, versus the good he has done. I happened upon a thread on Twitter today, where a guy was arguing that the fact that Lance Armstrong cheated to win some races was insignificant because Armstrong has raised something like $500 million through lending his celebrity to a cause. When challenged, the Twitter guy would just repeat the same argument, "case closed... discussion over."

I have never been comfortable with defending someone's bad actions by arguing about all the good they did. If that's your opinion, you're entitled to it, I suppose. However, if you're going to compare the good things accomplished in Lance Armstrong's name (and surely no one believes that Armstrong personally raised $500 million) with the harm he has done, then don't trivialize it by believing he cheated to win some races and that's all. If you believe that, you're buying into a rationalization. Either that, or you really don't understand the issue at all.

Yes, Lance Armstrong cheated to win some races. Throughout his career, as well as in retirement, he has responded to all accusations with not just denials, but with out and out threats towards the people and organizations which sought to bring his malfeasance to the light of day. He has, for years, actively undermined the very mechanisms that are in place to attempt to keep sports free of the type of cheating to which he now admits. And what of the people who have defended him over the years, who worked for his charity, who raised money in his name for a cause in which they believe with all of their hearts? I can only imagine the disappointment, the sense of betrayal that they must feel.

When you're adding up the credits and demerits of the sordid story of Lance Armstrong, cyclist, cancer survivor, liar, cheater, remember all of the people he has hurt. Remember that 17-year-old kid I told you about. If you want to play the game of balancing out the good that Lance Armstrong has done versus the harm, make sure that you give him a fair accounting.

No fuss, no muss, and no appetizers this week. I’m pumped for some good games this weekend, so let’s get right to the main course. Here’s the meat and potatoes, folks:

Saturday

Ravens at Broncos

The recipe for success for the Ravens is simple; they have to control the clock, avoid turnovers, and find a way to get the ball into Ray Rice’s hands early and often and give him enough time and space to make significant gains. With all the talk about Peyton Manning, it’s the Broncos defence that makes this such a tough matchup for the Ravens. The Broncos have an excellent pass rush, and will give the inconsistent Joe Flacco fits, forcing him out of the pocket where he is most comfortable, and into low-percentage throws. Once he gets settled in, Manning will be difficult to stop, so it’s imperative that the Ravens make him play from behind and limit his opportunities. Only a perfect effort gives the Ravens any chance, and I have seen enough of Flacco over the years to believe that this won’t happen. Winner: Broncos

Packers at 49ers

Much of the conversation leading up to this game surrounds Aaron Rodgers versus the 49ers’ defence, and rightfully so. Again this season, Rodgers has proven that he plays the QB position about as well as it can be played. No team can neutralize Rodgers right now; the best the ‘niners can hope to do is limit his mobility and take away his receivers. This is the healthiest that I can remember the Pack’s receiving corps being all season, so Green Bay should be able to muster a decent offensive effort. I think that the difference in this game will be the Packers’ defence. Surprisingly, no one seems to be talking about the impact that Charles Woodson’s return has had on Green Bay’s defence. Based on what I saw last week, Woodson managed to stay in good shape while being out with a broken collarbone, and his intelligence and defensive savvy really shone through last week against the Vikings. Woodson’s presence makes the Packers’ defence a lot more flexible in terms of what it can do with its other skill players, especially Clay Matthews. Woodson excels at lining up in the slot and working in coverage against a slot receiver or TE, as a run-stopper, and as a pass-rusher, and his presence will give Matthews greater freedom to use his superior pass-rushing skills to put pressure on San Fran’s mobile QB, Colin Kaepernick. Woodson’s injury has become a blessing in disguise for the Packers; he enters the playoffs having not had any meaningful contact for the better part of two months, thus leaving the 36-year-old less worn-out than in past seasons. I don’t see the 49ers being able to score enough points to keep up in this one. That said, I’m really looking forward to this game. Winner: Packers

Sunday

Seahawks at Falcons

There’s a tremendous amount of pressure on Matt Ryan and the Falcons’ offence to make a good showing in this year’s playoffs. The acquisition of WR Julio Jones to complement the wonderful Roddy White has paid huge dividends. This wideout tandem, along with ageless wonder Tony Gonzales, makes the Falcons’ passing attack extremely dangerous, capable of moving the chains efficiently and hitting big plays. Unfortunately for Atlanta, this has coincided with a severe drop-off in the efficiency of their running game, and particularly the ability of RB Michael Turner to contribute significantly. This does not bode well for the Falcons, as they face a Seahawks defence with the depth in the secondary to limit the Falcons’ effectiveness. This opens the door for Seattle’s offence to be the deciding factor. QB Russell Wilson has defied expectations by playing with a poise which belies his rookie status. There have been some questions this week as to the health of Seahawks RB Marshawn Lynch, but he strikes me as the sort of player who would not necessarily be limited by a minor foot injury. Meanwhile, the Falcons are dealing with a banged-up secondary, as well as an injury to DE John Abraham. Bad timing, and a bad matchup, will sink the Falcons. Again. Winner: Seahawks

Texans at Patriots

Before the Texans had even finished dispatching the Cincinnati Bengals last week, they had already been installed as huge underdogs against the Pats this week, and the talk quickly shifted to discussions of how Houston had no chance of beating New England, based on their lackluster play of late, and with the memory of a 42-14 blowout still fresh in everyone’s mind. Perennial hack and serial opportunist Dan Shaughnessy of the Boston Globe epitomized the media tack that followed, dredging up any kind of bullshit story to garner attention. Shaughnessy got in a couple of good slaps, referring to the Texans as “tomato cans” and saying, essentially, that the Pats, for all intents and purposes, were starting their playoff run with two byes. Courageous stand by Shaughnessy here: the Pats blow out the Texans, and he’s right; Pats win a close one, and the Texans were fueled by anger to put up a good fight due to his column; Pats lose, and he’s a jinx, or the Pats choked because they couldn’t handle the pressure he placed upon them. (There now, you don’t have to read his insufferable bombast on Monday. I scooped him.) So, what’s the real story? Tom Brady will have his unstoppable tandem of TEs, Gronk and Hernandez, plus Welker, Branch, Woodhead, and Brandon “makes at least one sideline catch per week that I’m convinced is incomplete until I see the replay” Lloyd at his disposal. As good as they are on defence, even with scary monster JJ Watt, how is Houston, or any team for that matter, supposed to counter that? Houston has good offensive balance, with talented receivers and the best (all-around) RB in football, Arian Foster (btw, I love Foster’s Twitter profile picture… the guy’s clever), but I have a difficult time imagining a scenario where, barring a major meltdown by the Pats’ offence, the Texans can score enough to keep pace. Winner: Patriots


I already have my title all ready for my Championship Sunday column: Three Men and a Baby. 

Enjoy the action, folks!

Well, folks, we’ve got one interesting slate of games this weekend, with four games that all look like they could go either way. A month ago, I’m not sure anyone could have predicted some of these matchups: the team that couldn’t do anything right on defence for half the season that got hot because of its defence playing the team that could have wrapped up home-field advantage weeks ago; a rematch from last week, where the home team would probably be on a bye this week were it not for a mistake made by an unqualified scab referee that a crew of unqualified scabs, with the benefit of replay, couldn’t sort out; last season’s worst team playing on the road against a team with an inferior record, even though the home team started out 9-2; and a game featuring two rookie starting QBs, where the home team was the last in the NFL to qualify for the playoffs, and is playing host to a team with a superior record.

Welcome to Wild Card Weekend in the NFL!

Saturday

Bengals at Texans

These are two teams which are remarkably similar on defence. They both rely on a great pass-rush, solid linebacker play, and strength in the secondary. The difference here lies in what they can do with their secondary. The Texans rely on top CB (and former Bengal) Jonathan Joseph to neutralize opponents’ top receiver and plan around this, while the Bengals’ depth in terms of quality players in the secondary allows them to stop pass-heavy game plans and frees up personnel to focus on the run. The situation that this creates is one where each defence is very well-suited to handle the other team’s offensive strength. The Bengals’ offence relies heavily upon the ability of Andy Dalton to get the ball into the hands of top offensive threat AJ Green, but Joseph and the Texans’ pass rush (ever heard of a guy named JJ Watt?) are the perfect antidote to this approach. The Texans’ attack is more balanced, with a steady (though unspectacular) running game, and a passing scheme which spreads the wealth, which means that, likewise, the Bengals’ defence matches up well in terms of personnel. And so, it comes down to intangibles. On offence, the Bengals will have to rely on strong run-blocking in order to give BenJarvus Green-Ellis a chance to make the significant gains needed to sustain drives. The Texans will rely heavily on Arian Foster, both in the running and passing game. Barring turnovers, this should be a close game, and in a close game, you need your skill players to make plays when it counts. Did you know that in spite of the fact that he has been in the league since 2004, has been a starter for six seasons, and has played in well over 100 games, Matt Schaub will be starting his first playoff game? Andy Dalton started a playoff game last year in his first season. When it comes right down to it, Dalton to AJ Green is scarier than Schaub to Andre Johnson. Winner: Bengals

Vikings at Packers

The Vikings beat the Packers last week in a game that they had to win just to make the playoffs. The Vikes got a spectacular game from Adrian Peterson, but they got that as well in their earlier loss to the Packers. The key to the Vikings’ win last week was QB Christian Ponder, who has struggled for much of the season, but who played well last week. The Vikings strength is in being able to have Peterson carry the offence, while their defence keeps them in it. The Packers scored 34 points last week against the Vikings. This is typical for the Packers when Aaron Rodgers plays as well as he did. The Vikings’ 37 points, on the other hand, were an anomaly. Last week was the Vikings’ playoffs. I do not expect this game to be close. Winner: Packers

Sunday

Colts at Ravens

I don’t quite know what to make of this Colts team. I’ve watched them play. They’re so-so. How they finished 11-5 is a real head-scratcher for me. Andrew Luck is amazingly talented, an absolute joy to watch. He can also be a bit of a train-wreck at times, a real turnover machine. The Ravens finished 10-6 after starting 9-2, and if that’s not an indicator of a serious problem, then I don’t know what is. Their defence has been wracked with injuries all season, and their offence is led by the inconsistent Joe Flacco—I don’t give a crap about statistics, just watch the guy. Ray Rice is going to have to be the difference-maker in this one. That should be enough. Winner: Ravens

Seahawks at Washington (DC)

This is the toughest game to call for me. The Seahawks look like the better team to me. They have the better record. They beat the Pats, the Pack, the ‘niners. There’s just something about them I don’t like. They just seem lucky to me. That fiasco against Green Bay. Their top CB doesn’t get suspended because of some mistake at a drug-testing lab. They lack depth at wideout. I’ve seen Sir Robert Griffin the Third play, and he is scary-good. Washington has the complimentary running game and defence to hang in against the Seahawks. I expect a tight game, and when that happens, go with the team with the best player. Winner: Washington (DC)