Enoch

I don't think that anyone not currently under a tinfoil hat is predicting a "collapse." It'll be tight for a few quarters, and the U.S. unemployment rate might even creep up to the level present in some of the healthier European economies. But nothing's going to collapse. I wouldn't worry about that, it's a glass of piss in a tsunami, (source) USA

Quite true. Unlike Volo, I certainly won't be doing any laughing at those who predicted a Packers victory in this game. I'm as shocked as they are. (Although I'm the good kind of shocked.) Nobody could have predicted this amazing turnaround in the Giants' passing game. 15 games of mediocre play, followed by 4 straight games of amazingly good play? The last time we saw a run that was anything like that, the year was 2003 and QB was Jake Delhomme. (The Panthers, if you recall, lost a close game in the Super Bowl, to New England.) As for Favre, he just looked terrible when he was throwing the ball into the wind. (GB was against the wind in the 1st, 4th, and OT periods.) The wind in the 2nd & 3rd quarters didn't seem to phase Eli nearly as much. And the Packers run game never went anywhere. I know McCarthy is getting a lot of flack for only calling 13 runs in a game where he never trailed by more than 6 points, but given that only 1 of those 13 runs was even moderately successful, I don't think you can really blame him. He deserves more blame for calling all those outside screen plays. Those plays depend on the WRs making good blocks, and I don't think that a single GB WR made any kind of block at all on any of those plays.

Finally got around to finishing my run through the NWN2 OC, and started on MotB. Played as far as the fight against Okku before I quit yesterday to watch the football games.

Agust

Yeah, GB's coaches were very stubborn in insisting that Al Harris cover Burress 1-on-1 for long after it became clear that Harris wasn't going to be winning that matchup very often. I know he made the Pro Bowl for the first time, but from what I've seen Harris' play has really fallen off this year. He deserved the Pro Bowl shot in '04-'06 (when he was losing out to overrated guys like DeAngelo Hall), but not in '07. As for Favre, I suspect he'll come back. With the youth on that team, they've got a good shot of making a run again next year, and I don't think he would want to miss that. The shocking thing to me is that the Giants held GB to 20 points without having a whole lot of success in the pass rush. Normally, their defense is strictly sack-and-burn ("either we'll sack you or you'll burn us"), but they got zero sacks, and precious few hurries and QB hits. Their LBs and DBs really played out of their minds in coverage. They were double-teaming Greg Jennings consistently, and although Driver did make them pay somewhat, nobody else stepped up and got open with any regularity. Overall, the game was a bit sloppy at times, and the officiating was inconsistent enough that homers on both sides can make a decent case that they were screwed. But there were lots of amazingly good plays, too. (Driver outrunning the field for the TD... Burress hanging on despite the killer hit by Bigby... Pierce's amazing blow-by-three-blockers tackle on the 3rd-down screen pass... Toomer's toe-touches-an-inch-ahead-of-his-elbow sideline catch.) I'll be remembering this one for years to come. Sure, the Giants'll be a justifiably huge underdog in the Bowl (as they have been for the past 3 weeks), but improbable runs like this are what make being a sports fan so much fun. Win or lose, if the Super Bowl is half as good a game as this one was, I'll be ecstatic. Oh, and WOOOOO!!!! GO GIANTS!!!!

Radiohead -- Bodysnatchers

Phil Rivers is "Doubtful" to play in the SD-NE game on Sunday. In NFL terms, "doubtful" means that it is almost certain that a player will not be able to play. That 14-point spread might start getting a bit bigger...

Both of the favorites should win. I'd love to see my Giants in the 'Bowl, but I recognize that, rationally, they don't have better than a 2-in-5 shot at winning in Green Bay. Getting 7 points, though, I'd take them (although a push looks pretty likely). On the points, I'll take the Over. The Pats will roll. The 14-point spread, though, is troubling. With a line that high, the rule of thumb is to either take the points (if you think that the underdog will keep it close) or stay the heck away. There are lots of games where the better team dominates the game, but doesn't win by 14 due to a meaningless late score, conservative playcalling, or the like. Putting money on a team to cover a spread that big, even when (as here, IMO) they're a clearly superior team is just a toss-up. You might as well bet on the wind speed at kickoff. But since there's nothing on the line here, I'll take the points. Weather conditions might keep the scoring relatively low. (Gimme the Under 46.5 as well.)

There's no k in panic. Cut the guy a break-- he's living in bat country. Yesterday was nasty here in the D.C. area. Started snowing around 9AM, gave us about an inch, then turned to sleet early in the afternoon. Rain followed sleet, so I got to walk home in the rain, on sidewalks covered with slush. Yuck. Fortunately, today is sunny and warmer, so most everything has been cleared off. Just one more workday, then comes the 3-day weekend. My fiancee is going to be out of town, so that means plenty of video games and football for me!

I was actually quite productive at work today. It doesn't happen as often as it probably should, but it's pretty satisfying when it does. Beware-- as income with which to buy games increases, time with which to play games decreases. The world is a cruel, cruel place.

I had been using AVG without any problems until recently. But I had 2 separate incidents where an update picked up false positives in an important game file (first was the CivIV:BTS installer, and second was the NWN2 launcher). The issues were addressed in later updates, but the experience was infuriating enough that I switched to Avast. When I have to spend my gaming time figuring out why my machine won't launch a game, I get angry. Anyhow, I don't think that I have seriously tested either program, though, because I don't do a whole lot with my computer that exposes me to a high virus risk. So a low-resource-load free program is best for my needs. If I were doing lots of P2P downloading or something, I'd invest in some serious protection.

How would an inferior team have a better chance? Match ups? The colts lost to QB Billy Voleck for $@%$ sakes. I would not count out the Giants either. You are going to have your hands full next week. On the whole, based on the evidence over the course of the entire season, I still don't think that SD is a superior team to Indy. Indy's offense had several long drives undone by turnovers that were at least in part dumb luck. (Forcing fumbles and bad passes is skill, but fumble recovery is luck, as is the direction that a ball goes when tipped into the air.) Their defense also played uncharacteristically poorly, but I'm willing to credit SD's receivers for getting far more open than I've opponents get in most Colts games this season. Don't get me wrong-- the Chargers played very well and deserve the win. But that doesn't necessarily mean that they'll do better against the Pats than the Colts would've. In any case, I'm still a bit giddy from the Giants' win. Eliminating the eternally-irritating Cowboys is really, really sweet. (And, yes, I will acknowledge that, based on the evidence over the course of the season, the Cowboys were a far superior team and would've had a better chance to beat GB next week.)

Captain Ahab?

Incidentially, there's a very interesting dialogue on the playoffs going on over on Slate between Aaron Schatz of Football Outsiders (which is a phenomenally good site) and K.C. Joyner of ESPN.com (which charges a subscription fee for his articles, so I don't read them).

I think you've got a colony of cranium rats on your hands. That's how they work-- start off using their mild psychic powers to inspire thoughts of mercy in those who threaten them, but once they have the numbers and the collective brain power, it's on to full-on mind control and world domination.

Pats 31, Jags 17 Colts 24, Bolts 10 Pack 27, Hawks 23 (Seattle covers) Boys 28, G-Men 24 (NYG covers) I'd love to be able to predict my Giants in an upset, but I just don't think it's particularly likely, especially with 2 of their top 3 CBs likely to miss the game. Really, they've already dramatically exceeded my expectations for this season (my pre-season guess: 7-9), and I wouldn't be at all unhappy if they lost to anybody but the Cowboys. But Dallas is just so insufferable with Romo's sh*t-eating grin, Phillips' childish celebrative dances, Owens' assorted jackassery, Jerry Jones' repeatedly-lifted naugahyde face, and the hordes of fair-weather fans around the country that I'm sure I'll be fuming at them by halftime. Especially with Dallas homer extraordinaire Joe Buck calling the game. (Troy Aikman actually manages to sound more even-handed than he does when calling the Cowboys!)

Straight-up, it's tough not to like the chalk this week. I wouldn't be shocked if either of the NFC underdogs pulled an upset. Both of the top NFC teams look better than their opponenets, but they also have enough flaws that they could end up on the losing end if the game goes the wrong way early. In the AFC, though, it seems very unlikely that anything is going to get in the way of a Pats-Colts AFCCG (a.k.a., "the real Super Bowl"). Yeah, I know the Chargers have beaten Indy already this season, but the Colts are much healthier now, and even then that game was in SD, very close in score, and full of anomalous events favoring SD that are extraordinarily unlikely to happen again (2 return TDs, Peyton throwing 6 INTs, Vinatieri missing 2 FGs). Plus, Gates is hurt. As for the Pats, the best sports comparison I've seen on them is Tiger Woods when he was on his tear of winning Majors. Sure, Tiger isn't perfect, and you can beat him, but to do so, you've got to sustain a level of play that is probably over your head for an entire tournament. If you slip at all, even for a bit, he's going to be right there with you, taking that stroll down the 18th fairway. Staying with the Pats is close to the same thing. Teams that really get up for the game can play with them for 2, 3, or even sometimes 4 quarters. But in the instant that they slip back to their normal level of play, even for a little bit, the Pats will see their opportunity and take control of the game. It's not that they're that much better than other teams when other teams play their best-- they're just playing at the top of their game far more consistently than any team I've ever seen. I like Jacksonville as a team, and I think they can win, but I wouldn't give them more than a 1-in-5 shot at doing so. (I haven't decided yet what I think about that 13 point spread.)

I'm not familiar with that one, but Paul Anka's swing cover of Wonderwall is excellent. He has (had?) some great arrangers working for him. I went looking for it, but instead found a different highlight from the same album: Paul Anka -- Jump

I was thinking that, too, before I realized that it was a Dungeon Siege spinoff. Perhaps with Space Trebuchets?

Peyton has led the NFL in passing yardage twice: in 2000 and 2003. (Link.) During those years, the Colts defense was not particularly good, ranking 20th in scoring/11th in yards in '03, and 15th in scoring/21st in yards in '00. (Link.) It's not the strongest example of the correlation out there, but it's a contributing factor to his high numbers those years. Mostly, I was trying to rebut the implication that any team with the top passer on their squad was doomed in the playoffs. That's just silly. Sure, it has always proven true in the past, but that doesn't mean that there's any causal relationship involved. It's like saying noticing that teams who run kneel-down plays at least 3 times in a game are 58-0 over the past 5 years,* and concluding that a team can guarantee victory by opening their first offensive drive with three kneeldowns. * (Stat is made up for explanatory purposes) Edit: And allow me to brag a bit-- my straight-up picks were 4-0 this week.

NFL passing leaders don't win the SB mostly because the biggest passing games tend to be the ones where your team is trailing by 3 TDs for most of the 2nd half (i.e., crappy defense correlates strongly with high passing yards, and teams with lead usually get conservative and stop passing so much). I don't see how the experience of those teams has anything to do with this years' Pats, who have anything but a crappy defense and prefer to keep throwing rather than go conservative when they get a lead. The line won't come out until it's the matchup is certain, but if they play next week, I'd guess that JAX-NE's line would be somewhere in the area of NE-8.5. Jacksonville has about as good a chance as anyone of taking NE down, but it's still not particularly likely. Look for NE to spread their receivers out on offense and throw to whoever is being covered by the ancient Terry Cousin.

Also, check the weather forecast. Sloppy, rainy conditions are not often kind to double-digit favorites.

Flaming Lips -- Are You a Hypnotist?