Sleeping with the Enemy: Week Nine, Chiefs @ Raiders

Been away from this feature for a minute. Had the bye-week blues a couple of weeks ago, and my Jaguars contact blew me off last week, so please forgive me. Sleeping with the Enemy is back, however, just in time for Raider Week, the sequel. This week we sat down with none other than Elwyn Grimes, Jr., who dons the Silver and Black on Sundays.

There was a time when we battled one another in the same fantasy league and talked smack on the message board. Now we do the same on Facebook, and hate each other's teams just as much as ever.

Our conversation, a mere click away.

Bankmeister: Let's get the Hot time, summer in the city. Back o' my neck gettin' dirty and gritty outta the way first. Are you from the Oaktown?

Elwyn Grimes, Jr.: Nope. Born and raised in Kansas City.

B: I see. So the obvious question then, is, how'd you become a Raiders fan?

E.G.: I'd have to say it was the first football game I remember watching, which would've been XV.

B: Raiders/Eagles? Heh. That was my first game, too.

E.G.: Yeah. And I've been hooked ever since. There was a time, though, when I would cheer for both the Chiefs and the Raiders--

B: Root for two squads in the same division? Unpossible!

E.G.: It seemed like everyone in Kansas City felt compelled to tell me that I couldn't be a Raiders fan. That and the, uh, oh, what was that Lin Elliot game where they had home field throughout?

B: Ah. Well, there were three occasions in which they've been 13-3 with a first-round bye, home-field advantage throughout the playoffs and gone home after one contest. The Lin Elliot year would be 1995, a 10-7 loss to the Colts.

E.G.: That's the one.

B: The other came in 1997 when the Broncos and Chiefs played each other for the only time in playoff history, and Denver knocked us off 14-10. Granted, they got some road cookin' goin' on in the form of a nullified Tony Gonzalez touchdown catch, but it wouldn't be a Broncos game without that kinda grease on the gears.

It happened again in 2003 when the Colts won again at Arrowhead in a puntless shootout. But what're some of your other sports teams?

E.G.: As far as baseball, I'm a Royals fan first, BoSox second. I like KU basketball and KU and Miami for college football.

B: Miami? For reals?

E.G.: Yeah. I think it was that 1984 Orange Bowl



when they beat Nebraska that sealed the deal for me.

B: So pick your poison: college or pro ball.

E.G.: Well, I liked the pros better than college for the longest time. Now it's kinda swung back in the other direction. I dunno if it's because the Raiders have been so bad for a decade or what. It's tough, though. They had so many good players back than. And both clubs did in that Super Bowl: Mike Quick, Harold Carmichael, Jim Plunkett, Wilbur Montgomery, Cliff Branch.

B: What about your hatred for Notre Dame? Are you one of these guys that hates them because of the television contract?

E.G.: I suppose the TV stuff has fueled my hatred for them, but before that it was games like the one in which they beat Miami on the last-second failed two-point conversion in South Bend. There was a fight in the tunnel before the game. It was especially tough because Miami had crushed 'em 45-10 the previous year. That was the game where they had the Catholics vs. Convicts t-shirts.



But also, I never liked Lou Holtz. He irritates me.

B: Why? How can you hate Lou?

E.G.: Probably just because of his Notre Dame affiliation. If he'd never been there, been somewhere else, I'd probably like him.

But there was also the '88 national title, the time they beat Tennessee on a last-second touchdown in like '91 or '92. I just don't like 'em.

B: Fair enough. Getting back to the NFL, though, what're your top three Raider memories?

E.G.: Well, the Super Bowl against the Redskins for sure. In 1983. Jack Squirek had an interception before halftime and ran it in. There was a Tyrone Wheatley touchdown in Kansas City, which happened to be the first Raiders/Chiefs game I attended. We actually won that one. It had to've been around 2000, I think. And then the other is from that same Super Bowl: the Marcus Allen 79-yard touchdown run.

B: Okay. Since a lot of your Raiders talk is Super Bowl-related, let's talk about the Pirate Bowl, the Raiders/Bucs matchup of 2002.

E.G.: Ugh. When the playoffs started that was the one team I didn't want the Raiders to face. I thought Tampa was the one squad that could give the Raiders trouble. It was a hunch that proved right; I stopped watching about halfway through the fourth quarter.

B: That was really a bizarre matchup. I'm sure you remember that it was, of course, a way for Jon Gruden to spit in Al Davis' face. What was the craziest thing, though, was all of that footage in the off week of him taking snaps under center and mirroring Rich Gannon's tendencies for his defensive unit.

E.G.: Yeah. He was a well-prepared coach. I absolutely loved Jon Gruden.

B: Things really seemed to go downhill for Oakland after that. What do you think happened?

E.G.: Well, there are, I think, three things that you can identify that've lead to the Raiders demise. One is letting go of Gruden. Two is Gannon's neck injury that pretty much ended his career. And the third is the Tuck Rule.

B: 'Scuse me?

E.G.: Well, if that doesn't happen--

B: Wait. We're talking Oakland/New England in the snow in Foxboro. Tom Brady, right?

E.G.: Exactly. I think if that play doesn't happen, the Raiders go to the Super Bowl, probably win it, and have success beyond that season. I truly, truly believe that.

B: Why?

E.G.: Well, I think if it doesn't happen, then Al Davis doesn't feel desperate after. He remains capable of making rational decisions.

B: Huh. Fascinating. Since you brought that up, I was listening to the SportsTalk Radios today, and someone made the comment that they often wondered if Al Davis was intentionally running his franchise into the ground. They said that his business simply isn't good for the NFL, and they wondered if the league would ever step in and assume control of the franchise to better the league's image.

E.G.: Well, that's probably just wishful thinking. I think Al Davis still thinks he's doing what's best for the organization.

B: Okay. What were your thoughts on the Lane Kiffin regime?

E.G.: I thought it was a strange hire. He was good at developing quarterbacks, but I would never take a college offensive coordinator in and make him a head coach at the pro level. If you're groomin' him it's one thing, but NCAA O.C. to NFL H.C. is a Quantam Leap. That's why it was a strange hire, but it was a good hire in contrast to the second coming of Art Shell, who hired a defensive coordinator that'd been running a bed and breakfast.

B: That ain't no lie. What about firing Kiffin, though? Naturally, the argument there is that he wasn't given nearly enough time to prove he wasn't cut out for the job.

E.G.: I think that was Al Davis' paranoia more than anything else.

B: Did you watch that press conference?

E.G.: No. I saw part of it. I just remember a whole lot of "he wasn't who I thought I'd hired."

B: The next time you have a minute, you've got to watch the whole thing. Al Davis is a fascinating creature.



(Editor's Note: Also available in parts I, II, III, VI, and V)
E.G.: He is. I remember hearing that, 10 minutes before the Tom Cable hiring, Davis leaned over to an assistant and pointed to Cable's name in the media guide and said, "Who's this guy again?"

B: Wow. That's amazing.

E.G.: What's even worse was when Cable was the interim coach. Davis didn't like what certain reporters were writing so he started banning them from the press box. Eventually the NFL stepped in and, basically, they were like, "Dude -- you cannot ban people from the press box."

B: Well, all of that behavior sort of certifies the ongoing claim that the man is senile. There's even the latest claim from the organization against ESPN, that it has continued to paint the Raiders in a negative light.

E.G.: Yeah. That's just Al Davis spilling into the media.

B: The stories really go on. You have post-retirement Warren Sapp saying that Davis would call down to the field and allegedly say "We're going deep on this next one."

E.G.: I tend to believe it. He's got his hands in every part of what happens out there. He's a hard guy to figure out. He wants to be seen as a maverick.

B: Well, and he was. Thirty years ago.

E.G.: Exactly, but now, I mean...there's a time to pick your battles. There comes a time when you have to realize that maybe doing things your way isn't the best way, but he refuses to do any differently. I liked Warren Sapp when he was happy, but how many Raiders players stay happy? I remember him saying after he retired: "Whatever you do, you do not want to go play for Oakland."

B: Was Gruden the best coach you've seen in your lifetime?

E.G.: (pauses) No. Well...I still have to give the nod to Tom Flores and his two Super Bowl wins.

B: How much Monday Night Football have you watched in the last 10 years?

E.G.: A lot. Probably 85-90 percent of the games.

B: Tell me about Gruden in the booth. I feel like for a long time the MNF duo was solid, and then they changed it up and it's been pretty shitty. I think Gruden's awesome, but I've also heard some gripes.

E.G.: I think he's really good and most people I talk to agree. I hated Cornheiser. Theismann was alright. I mean, he was better than Dennis Miller, and I liked their attempt with Miller.

B: Speaking of changes, somebody once told me: "You can change your religion, your spouse, and your sex, but you can never, ever change your team." Agree or disagree?

E.G.: I can't imagine ever not being a Raiders fan. I mean, it'd be a lot easier to be a Steelers fan right now. But I'd never be a Pats fan.

B: Why not?

E.G.: Pats fans are arrogant. Fan bases like theirs have such a sense of entitlement, like everything's ours to lose.

B: What about some of the characters that have been on your team's roster in recent years? Guys like Javon Walker.

E.G.: It used to be that misfits and miscasts were brought together as a team, but that doesn't work anymore.

B: I would look no further than this year's Washington Redskins.

E.G.: Yeah. They just don't mesh well. Guys like Walker, DeAngelo Hall -- who they cut after eight games -- Gibril Wilson, Tommy Kelly.

B: What about the Richard Seymour signing?

E.G.: For a second I thought he could bring a different attitude, be a unifying force, but the culture of that locker room is so fractured that not even a Pro Bowl/Super Bowl resume can bind things together.

B: This is all leading us in the direction of your leader, your key figure.

E.G.: Oh. I feel a headache coming on...

B: JaMarcus Russell. It's quite possible that he could finish the season with the worst completion percentage in NFL history.

E.G.: That's probably pretty accurate.

B: What went wrong there? Has he hit his ceiling? Is he a product of his environment? Just plain simply a bad pick?

E.G.: He was a one-year starter at LSU. He put up incredible numbers and has an awesome arm. But I think he's incapable of reading a defense. It's the same thing as with Ryan Leaf. Maybe worse than Ryan Leaf. God, is that even possible? Yes. It is. He's clearly that bad.

I just don't think he has the tools to be an NFL quarterback. He's awful. Awful.

B: I don't get to see a lot of Raiders games, but I caught the one against Denver, and the first contest against the Chiefs. He looked outright terrible. Throwing five yards behind guys, hitting the ground...Do you get to see many games?

E.G.: Not a lot. I listen to the radio via the Web, and catch what I can on TV and Sportscenter.

B: How is it that he was that good in college, but this bad in the pros?

E.G.: I have no idea. I mean, it's the same thing as Robert Gallery.

B: Wait a minute. Gallery's played decent.

E.G.: Yeah. As a right guard. But they brought him in as a left tackle and that's the same mistake they made with Russell: They looked at nothing more than one year of film and made their decision on that, but that's the rudderless ship that is the Oakland Raiders.

B: Do you take a lot of grief in KC as a Raiders fan?

E.G.: I catch all sorts of hell, but mostly in good fun. I tend to give as good as I get.

B: Have you had any negative experiences at Arrowhead? Do you go out their and represent the Silver and Black?

E.G.: I've been to three or four games in my Raiders gear. Nothing real, real bad has happened for the most part.

B: What about home games? You ever been to one in Oakland? Is it as bad as the rumours suggest?

E.G.: That's something I really wanna do is go to a game at the Black Hole.

B: What've you heard from those who have? I've heard stories from fans about security suggesting late-fourth-quarter escorts to visiting fans. Trent Green has said that that's the one stadium in the league where his family was not allowed to sit in non-box seats.

E.G.: I've heard 'em all. I've heard those stories and others where people have gone and had no problem. I think some of it gets blown out of proportion.

B: Let's talk division hatred. Who do you despise the most?

E.G.: Well, the Chiefs are on top, far and away. When you live in KC, you hear Chiefs fans all the time, and over the last 15 years, the Chiefs have really had the Raiders' number, so I hate them the most. Then the Broncos, then the Chargers.

B: Really? Even with things as they are right now? Chargers are last?

E.G.: The Chargers pop up every five years. They're there. Then they're gone. They're just there. When LaDainian Tomlinson's gone, they'll fall off even more.

B: I think you could make the argument that he's gone already, but whatever. What're your thoughts on Denver?

E.G.: Who's their owner? Pat Bowlen? I think he's one of the better owners in the league, so I can't fault them there. I certainly hated John Elway and Shannon Sharpe and Bill Romanowski (when he was there). And Shanahan, too. He had the Raiders' number.



B: You ever hear about the bit in Shanahan's book where he claims that Al Davis still owes him like $300 grand, and that Shanahan wants Davis to donate it to the Oakland public schools or something?

E.G.: No. I haven't heard that, but it wouldn't be a terrible stretch of the imagination for Al Davis to still owe him some money.

B: How does this division shake up at the end of this season?

E.G.: Chargers win, Broncos second, Raiders in third, Chiefs last.

B: And next year? Repeat?

E.G.: I think they'll flip flop at the top, but the Chiefs and Raiders will still battle for the basement.

B: How about this Sunday's game?

E.G.: I think it'll be a really poor display of football. They've won in each other's stadiums for some time now, but I have a hard time believing the Chiefs pull it out. They are just not talented in a lot of areas, and I haven't seen anything out of the Chiefs defense to lead me to believe they'll rise up.

B: And Oakland is?

E.G.: The Raiders are talented but they don't work well together. They just run the ball.

B: Who will we see a lot of? Both Bush and Fargas?

E.G.: Yeah. Both, but again, that's because JaMarcus Russell is so bad. So bad at throwing the ball.

B: Score prediction?

E.G.: Thirteen-10, Raiders.

B: Any thoughts on this new Kansas City regime?

E.G.: Well, when Carl Peterson first got here, up until about 2006, I think he had the best intentions. I really think he was trying to win a championship for Lamar. But to be successful, everything from the top down has to fall into place. They never found that complete balance.

B: If you took over for Al Davis tomorrow, and you had to choose between the second coming of Art Shell and Herman Edwards to coach you team, who would you pick?

E.G.: I can't go with the first version of Art Shell?

B: Nope.

E.G.: I guess I go with Herm.

B: Did he get a fair shake in KC?

E.G.: Yeah. I think he probably did.

B: So what about Scott Pioli hiring Todd Haley to be his head coach who had but two years as a coordinator versus the New York Jets hiring Herman Edwards to coach their team when he'd only been a defensive backs/linebackers coach. Is the time logged as a coordinator that big?

E.G.: Taking that step to coordinator might be that huge. You're working with not just the intricacies of one position but the whole thing working together as a unit.

B: Will Herm ever get a head coaching job in the NFL again?

E.G.: No, not without some other steps. He'll be a DC somewhere, and maybe then as a head coach. Not directly.

B: How long should Haley get?

E.G.: At least three seasons. He has to be given a chance to get players on board, schemes implemented, unless of course you see a big step backwards.

That being said, Cable should be gone.

B: Really? Already? Who do you like?

E.G.: I wanted Dick LeBeau, but as I said, it's a rudderless ship out there.

B: Well thanks for stopping by. I, for the record, am saying that KC wins this one, 23-16.


Read more

Friday Fix: Wha' Happen?

Here's a fun mini-movie for everyone to watch:



Chris over at JustBlogBaby put it together and called it "JaMarcus Owns Denver."

It's a nice little movie of Russell completing passes against the Bronco defense both in Denver and in Oakland, although it doesn't make sense to me: I could've sworn the Raiders got smoked on Monday night against Denver in last year's season opener. We don't get to see that in the footage. Either that or I missed it.

(Update: When I watched it on his site, there was music. Now I realize that the site logo is covering the Denver score, and the Raiders are getting worked in the early footage. Either way, I'll be on board with JaMarcus owning Denver. That's awesome.)
Read more

Sunday Sermon: Starter Snippet

Even though they continue to employ the biggest bozo in Kansas City sports-talk radio, KCSP 610 AM is reporting that Matt Cassel gets the start today in the Chiefs home opener against the Oakland Raiders.

This is a stupid decision because a) why rush back from injury, 2) Brodie Croyle played well against a tough defense, and c) it'd be nice to see the kid get a win. Also, he doesn't rock White Sox hats. I'd much rather see me some Brodie Bangs today.
Read more

Sleeping with the Enemy: Week Two, Raiders @ Chiefs

Welcome in, HoGnation to the first in-season football post of 2009. Naturally, this is a shame because I offered no analysis of the Chiefs' pre-season, or a review of week one at Baltimore. That said, these were my thoughts regarding that game: 1) I thought it would be a route so I was pleased when it was not, 2) The defensive/special teams plays that kept KC in the game through most of the fourth quarter were reason to be excited for that game and that game only, 3) I dug Todd Haley's animation on the sideline



as well as 4) Brodie Croyle's performance on the field. It was a loss, but the result, at least, was what I expected. Aside from a pass-happy offense, the Ravens were, a-hem, who I thought they were.

That said, it's time to kick off another season of "Sleeping with the Enemy," where we sit down for a minute with a fan of the week's opponent. Last year, Oakland Raider fan Zeitgeist joined us. He was kind enough to offer us his time again for Sunday's game. My questions, his words, post-jump.

Bankmeister: For starters, how much football did you watch last weekend? Did you see the Chiefs-Ravens game? Denver-Cincy? If so, what were your thoughts on them? Second, I assume you watched Oakland-San Diego Monday night. What did you think of your team's performance?

In my estimation, the Raider defense surprised a lot of folks last year, yet they let the beautifully mulleted Rob Ryan go, and, after one game, it would appear to be even better? There was a lot of front-line domination going on, and even though the Chargers had to piecemeal an offensive line early in the game, it seems as if this unit is for real. Was that game a fluke, or is this Oakland D going to punch a lot of teams in the mouth?

Zeitgeist: I saw a most of the Chiefs Ravens game. Brodie Croyle coming off an 0-8 in starting was there to replace an injured Matt Cassel; it didn't look good. However, he completed 16 of 24 passes (66.7%) for 177 yards and tied a career high with two TDs. Defense and special teams looked good with a punt block for a return, as well as a Derrick Johnson INT for a lengthy 70-yard return. It looked like they might just have something, and alas, I was not surprised they just couldn't pull it off. Much credit to Joe Flacco and Ravens D. In the end, 188 yards for the Chiefs vs. 501 yards for the Ravens, and you get the picture: still lots of work to be done at Arrowhead.

All I caught were highlights of the Broncos-Bengals game, and by the looks of it that's all I needed to see. Congratulations to Kyle Orton for his flop of a game-saving touchdown (if that's what you call it). In our fantasy league his points actually beat out P. Manning's. What was I thinking benching him(Orton) over Manning!?

Now on to the Monday night game(s).

I pretty much yawned my way through the Patriots-Bills game. I really had no interest in either team, and throwback uniforms kinda make me sick. They always look so bad, why remember that? I watched it for maybe a new glimpse of the T.O. Show but his day was a fizzle. Mostly waiting for the next game and a girlfriend of mine to bring some food and drinks. I'll pass the time with football any day.

Raiders-Chargers was a game I went into with much doubt on my shoulders for my team. I was reluctant to applaud when things were going right but soon couldn't help myself. The addition of Richard Seymour to the defense was awesome for them. Sacking Rivers twice in the first half and holding the elusive L. Tomlinson at bay. I admit that I thought Rob Ryan was one of the only good things the Raiders organization hadn’t fired and was surprised to see a very improved defense this season. I know it's only week one, but keep up that practice, and you are going to win some games. Two things they were not prepared for: the two-minute-drill power of Philip Rivers and the explosive speed and small size of Darren Sproles. It will be very interesting to see the adjustments made by this defense in the upcoming Chiefs game. From what I saw however they have what it takes to be a contender. Is the offense ready to support?

B: I couldn't agree with you less regarding that Pats-Bills game. I don't care much for either club, but I thought it was a good game. Also, I think throwbacks in all sports are pretty awesome, unless they're the powder-blue Chargers, which are guh-ayy. Powder blue is supposed to be reserved for bad Kansas City baseball only.

There is indeed much work to be done for the Chiefs, and I think we're far from knowing just what the Denver Broncos will bring this season. I'd argue the same for the Chargers. An interesting thought I had though: Our two teams have a lot in common this year. Most are expecting that they will generally suck, even though there are the select few that have predicted close-to-.500 finishes for both Kansas City and Oakland. Since the last time we spoke, the Chiefs have completely cleaned house. There's a new general manager, head coach, team of coordinators, and mostly a new roster as well. Comparing this year's 53-man for the Chiefs with what it looked like at the end of last season, 30 players have been cut; some three have found NFL jobs since their departure.

So I'm curious: Do you think this franchise is heading in the right direction? Are they making smart choices? Is it too early to tell?

I'll ask you the same about your club. Obviously, most NFL fans think negatively of Al Davis. We've covered him in the past, so we'll leave him be for the most part. The weird thing to me, though, is the promotion of Tom Cable from offensive coordinator to interim coach, leaving him in that position while you interview other candidates, and then deciding to stick with him in the end. Seems like that's somewhat of a rarity in professional sports, but it could wind up being a smart choice. What are your thoughts on your coach? Did you have any opinion on the jaw punch he delivered to his assistant? Do I understand correctly that that assistant was then relieved of his duties?

As far as the squad, Darren McFadden showed last year, against the miserly Chiefs at least, that he could be a pretty promising rock toter. Monday night looked decent for him as well. Factor in Michael Bush and Justin Fargas when healthy and the Oakland running game could be stellar. As with any running game, this depends heavily on the blocking scheme of the offensive line, which, if Monday night was for real, they should be tough. The defense, as I mentioned, seems to be improved, which bodes well for the Raiders in a potentially weak division of offensive schemes.

The X-factor, in my opinion, continues to be JaMarcus Russell. I don't know how much you follow the SportsTalkRadios, the newspaper columnists, or the blog writers. I follow each in varying degrees, but try to keep my opinions my own. Russell is one topic of discussion in which I can do little more than agree with all of them in the sentiment that he is simply not a good quarterback.



The one compliment that he keeps getting is that he's a large physical specimen, which, to me, is a back-handed way of saying "fatass that hasn't, and might not, develop into a real deal." We talked a bit about him last year, but your thoughts now? Any comment on Russell sporting that trendy mohawk that has unfortuneately come back into fashion for the kidz?

What about this receiving corps? What's the deal with Javon Walker? He's on the roster, but I've heard nary a peep about him. Johnnie Lee Higgins? Darrius Heyward-Bey? Think these guys'll pan out? Looks to me like Louis Murphy and Zach Miller (TE) are the only decent threats Russell has to target. Who's gonna lead this team in catches? Receiving TDs?

Finally, where do you see this team finishing in the standings? Give us a place, and a win-loss prediction, give us a prediction for the game, and tell us, assuming you're going to the 'Head regaled in silver and black, where you're sitting. And if you won't be in attendance, explain to us why you won't be supporting your team in person.

Z: Oh man, leave the Royals out of this; I can only do one bad K.C. team at a time. I can understand the devotion of a Chiefs fan in the hardest of times, because I'm a Raiders and Royals fan. It's pretty bad when even Detroit has a better sports demographic.

It's hard to tell this early in the season if it is the right direction, however it is without a doubt a very "new" direction, which is something the Chiefs have needed for a long time. The Chiefs have been teetering on the clean-house totter for quite some time and after the long awaited resignation of Carl Peterson, I think this organization can finally start anew. I'm excited to see the progress and the unavoidable mistakes that can be made by a fresh team. I gotta tell ya though: Watching Chiefs new Head Coach Todd Haley light up Brodie Croyle like he did early with 9:35 left in the first quarter (Croyle was sacked on 2nd and 9, the Ravens took a timeout....and then the Chiefs took a time out. Why? Brodie Croyle get couldn't the play called in time.) To watch Haley flare up like he did shows real devotion to a winning team and not to players who don't know their job. I could be wrong, but I liked it! With the current staff and attitude I think they have made the best choices they could. Only time will tell on this one.

I'm sooooo done with blaming Al Davis for this team. It might be a factor, but it still comes down to the field. However, when it comes to coaching changes and head scratching afterward this it totally Davis' m.o. That being said, I think I like Tom Cable where he is. The whole punching Randy Hanson thing is nearly a closed case and no charges have been pressed so far. I also heard that this particular asst. had problems with Kiffin also, and was suspended after the Sept 2008 games vs. Denver after harsh words were spoken to the coach. Have not heard about a firing though; looks like they are handling it internally. I'm new to the Tom Cable philosophy and whether it's constructive or not. Right now in hostility-filled Oakland, seems like a good fit.

I couldn't agree more on several levels with the running game and the direction the Raiders are headed with it. This leads into the JaMarcus Russell problem too. Russell has never seemed to be able to calm down enough to keep his accuracy at bay. Several times this last game he threw the ball to no one. I think the organization is putting a lot more emphasis on the run in order to compensate for these problems with the newish QB. Is he or is he not a good QB? Right now I'm leaning towards no. He has a lot of ability and strength, his college performances were outstanding.

However in the NFL everything is faster and everyone is bigger. After sustaining that knee injury last week and getting right back on the field there is no question he is dedicated. He needs to start becoming a leader and heading the charge of this run game, if they could work that one-two punch this team has it. Right now it just looks as if again the run is there to compensate for a still unproven Russell. What’s Matt Leinart doing these days? I'm sure he can prove something.

As for the receiving core I'm about as lost as you are. J. Walker is not hurt but holds a position behind Heyward-Bey and J. Lee Higgins who has a shoulder injury right now. All things being said JaMarcus didn't even hit a wide out against the Chargers until I can’t remember but seemed like around halftime. Which goes back to my point: until this passing game smoothes out, the Raiders are going to still have to fight hard to win, all blown touchdown calls aside (thanks a lot Ref!).

I am not afraid to think that this Raiders team can and will hit .500 or a maybe a little over. With the talent I saw, they definitely have the potential. Would love to go to the game, but the last day of my current employment ends the Saturday before. Will be watching on high def at home saving those ever-precious dollars in a sketchy economy. Chiefs games ain’t cheap.

Man I dunno what to say about the opening mohawk that (Russell and) Shawne Merriman displayed. Apparently if you choke your girlfriend it's acceptable to where a "bro-hawk." JaMarcus may have his issues on the field but off he seems to me to be solid character. My real prediction for this game is that both teams are claiming rights to prove why they should have won the last game. Looking at both teams after watching both games I'm fairly certain the Raiders have it in for the Chiefs. This, of course, depends on the health of Matt Cassel. I say Raiders by +10. What the over/under would be is out of my understanding. Both teams have WAY too much to prove. That is if I even understood this season’s officiating rules, which are getting pretty obscure.

B: Awesome. Well thank you, sir, once more, for your time. We'll see you Sunday. I'm calling for the home team by four.
Read more

Previewing the NFL Season, House Style: The AFC West

The wife is asleep, I've finally found employment--and am looking forward to 8 hours of orientation tomorrow--the gin and tonic is a-flowin' and training camp starts next week. So it's time, children, to take a completely unbiased look at our own fave division, that western arm of the American Football Conference.

Of course, by "unbiased," I mean "from the perspective of a Denver fanbot who has managed to convince himself that Jay Cutler is only one whiskey soda away from renal failure, so hello, Kyle Orton." Follow, please, and then throw mud (and/or things that vaguely resemble it) in the comments...

The Kansas City Chefs

2008 Record: 2-14

That was a heck of a year, eh, KC fans? Don't lie. I know that you all loved watching your beloved red-clad band of homos be embarassed at home by the likes of the Buffalo Bills en route to the worst season in franchise history.

How could you not? You had your Larry Johnson playing Scarface quotes at press conferences, your Dwayne Bowe dropping on-side kicks that hit him in the chest, your Herm Edwards. You had Glen Dorsey playing like Tommy Dorsey. You had a force-fed and ill-considered youth movement that smothered all hope of success, you had a goofy spread system, you had one of the worst pass rushes the NFL has ever seen (fewest sacks in one season since they started tracking the stat. Good gravy.)

It was so bad that Tyler Thigpen looked like a bright light. Yes, Tyler Thigpen. It's a wonder that you all didn't put on white robes and gather at the Plaza for a civic Drano-chug.

So how, you ask, could it get any worse? Well, I'll be happy to tell you: just hire the offensive coordinator of a one-year Super Bowl wonder, a guy who is going from working with some of the game's best skill position players to some of its worst. Then allow him to employ that same team's defensive boss, a dude who oversaw a pretty poor group, was evidently nicknamed "pink panties" by his own players and who is expected to teach a 4-3 team to play the 3-4, despite his own apparent predilection for the 4-3.

Top that off with a draft that left most analysts scratching their heads in befuddlement, and lo! You have the makings of yet another long, long season in the City of Fountains. It probably won't be 2-14 bad, but awful nonetheless. If it makes you all feel better, Mike "The Silv" Silver of Yahoo! Sports picks your team to be a surprise playoff contestant in '09; too bad that guy is a Birkenstock-licking Berkeley hermaphrodite.

The House Says: 4-12, last place in the AFC West

**************************************

The Oakland Raiders

2008 Record: 5-11

Ah, Oakland. When I was young, you were a team to be feared, a collection of future HoFers who talked tough and whipped everyone's asses besides.

Al Davis still thinks you are that team, Oakland; in fact, he still thinks it's 1973. He drafts players based entirely on their 40-yard dash times, demands that his coaches employ an antique 7-step drop deep passing game, sends down defensive calls from the owners' box and stubbornly, wholeheartedly believes in something called "the greatness of the Raiders." So, too, do Oakland's remaining fans, who are easily identified on messageboards nationwide by their use of the caps lock key and poor command of elementary-level grammar.

The reality, though, is that this franchise smells worse than Dom DeLuise's corpse in an Alabama summer. They've lost 10 or more games every year since they made the Super Bowl, the last year of Gruden's tenure (and, more important, the last time they had a decent GM with the juice to fight Davis). Their young quarterback, whom they took with the #1 overall pick, is likely to lose his job to Jeff Garcia, last seen helming the Buccaneers' ship as it sank to the bottom of Tampa Bay. Their run defense is embarassingly bad, they have no wideouts anyone fears and are likely to start a rookie safety that would probably have gone undrafted if they hadn't taken him in the 2nd fucking round.

So, Raider Nation, I'd like to ask you all something: how can everyone in the world not from Oakland be a "Raider Hater" when there's simply nothing to hate? Your team sucks, you're all a pack of mouth-breathing trogs and there aren't enough of you to sell out your tiny stadium. It would be a more honest representation of your squad's place in the NFL hierarchy if they played their games on the playground at Lake Merritt, against selected convicts from Pelican Bay. They'd still probably go 3-13.

The House Says: 5-11, third place in the AFC West (simply because I'm feeling generous, and because it will get in The Administrator's craw.)

**************************************

The Denver Broncos

2008 Record: 8-8

Last year's Broncos team fielded probably the worst defense I have ever seen. I mean, wow. Really, really bad. I grew to hate watching their games by the end of the year--The experience was akin to having someone you dislike duct-tape you to a straight-backed chair and poke you in the ribs, over and over, with a tuning fork.

Blame can be assigned everywhere: to Mike Shanahan, for forgoing the construction of an NFL-quality defense in favor of stockpiling offensive talent and for hiring his old college coaching buddy in a kind of affirmative action for rich white dudes. To said college coaching buddy, Bob Slowik, for being a passive milquetoast whose greatest attribute--I shit you all not--was evidently that he used computer animation to illustrate his points in meetings. (He should have chosen some old-school Japanese anime, something with plenty of disemboweling and firebombing, but he clearly went with Allegro Non Tropo.)

The mess was so ugly, really, that no one escapes responsibility. Shanahan was lustful of power and couldn't give up even a scratch to a competent GM (read: not Ted Sundquist, who was treated like a saint by the Denver media for reasons I could never divine)-if he had, the Broncos would never have fallen out of the league's elite the way they did. The guy simply could not judge talent on that side of the ball. His list of draft-day failures is long and depressing, so much so that I won't even bother to go into it, save to repeat the oft-repeated fact that, from 2000-2005, the Broncos drafted exactly *one* player who is still starting on their defense, D.J. Williams. Holy. Fuck. You have to work to be that bad at the draft.

The flipside, as most homers will quickly tell you, is that last season's offense was nearly as good as the defense was execrable. Lookatalltheyards! They say. And here comes coach Mc(insert insult that starts with the letter "D") to mess it all up! Gahhhhh!

I'm a homer. But I'm also a realist. At least, when it suits me to be one. For all of Denver's offensive show-offery last year--they were fantastic at moving the ball between the 20s, and Jay Cutler did in fact throw for the 3d most yards in the league--they were pedestrian when it came to actually scoring touchdowns, only ranking 16th. Apologists will point to the many, many running backs who ended the season on injured reserve; yet, thanks to a young and excellent offensive line, that poor rushing attack still averaged nearly 5 yards a carry.

So what was the real problem? A few elements: Jay Cutler threw the most picks of anyone not named Brett Favre, many of them at crucial moments and in the red zone. Brandon Marshall caught a ton of passes--but only six for scores. Tony Scheffler led the league in average yards per catch but disappeared near the goal line. Mike Shanahan fell in love with an offensive gameplan that amounted to pass, pass, pass again, hope Jay doesn't throw an interception, Christ that was close, OK, pass.

The defense didn't help the offense, certainly--they were among the very worst in the league at forcing turnovers, along with winless Detroit--but the converse was also true. The constant air raid, led by a QB addicted to throwing into triple coverage, never gave a weak D any rest. It's a wonder that they were even in position to win the division at all, especially when you add in the eternal problem of our un-special special teams.

And yet, they were. Kyle Orton is not in Jay Cutler's league when it comes to skill, but he possessed a nearly identical TD-to-INT ratio and, hilariously, led a bereft Chicago Bears offense to more points than Cutler did Denver's. And it wasn't like he was doing it behind some updated version of the Monsters of the Midway; last year's Bears team ranked #21 in overall D, Denver at #29. Against the pass, Chicago was nearly as bad as we were.

So all of that bloviation leads me to this: Jay Cutler is a whiny lying creep who demanded a trade before Josh McDaniels even showed up, Mike Nolan is a significant upgrade over Slowik, our secondary will be light years better than it was previously (Brian Dawkins over Calvin Lowery? I say yes) and we drafted the best back in college football. The schedule is murderous, we won't make the playoffs, we have no true 3-4 nose tackle--unless Ron Fields or Chris Baker shocks the world--but we won't be nearly as bad as the John Claytons of the world imagine.

The House Says: 8-8, second place in the AFC West

**************************************

The San Diego Chargers

2008 Record: 8-8

Remember when no one cared about this team?

Oh, right, they still don't.

The House Says: 11-5, first place in the AFC West, first-round playoff exit and the end of a particular group of players that could have won multiple Super Bowl championships. Suck on it, you worthless SoCal bandwagon wannabes. Enjoy rooting for the Irvine Chargers in three years.
Read more

Wednesday WhatYouWill: Who Done Made Oakland 'Dey Bitch Mo' Often?

If there's one thing the old Iron Triangle of the House of Georges can agree on, it's that we're lazy. Now, our individual lazinesses will amaze you with the different angles and degrees they embody, but in the end, our collective sloth really needs you to type these words for us -- we're that lazy. Now, a certain leg of said triangle has this tendency vanish for periods of time, then re-appear, all Sleepy Hollow-like, and drop comment bombs all over the lazy work we've barely been managing to accomplish.

Now I'm not going to point fingers or drum up some Power Point, but if you look, oh, I dunno, roughly in this area, you might get an idea of that which I speak.

So naturally, I looked into it, and hey, why not give Oakland some shoutage since they've finally figured out who Lane Kiffin's replacement is.

Over the course of the last 30 NFL seasons (Editor's Note: I think that's post-stegosaurs, but I am also a dim-witted imbecile.), the Kansas City Chiefs and the Denver Broncos have played the Raiders -- be they the Oakland or the Los Angeline variety -- on a few occasions. Now, before I share my findings, understand that said comment bomber will likely point to some specific two-to-three-span, and claim it was that era to which he referred. Nevertheless, finding suggest that from the years 1979-2008:

1) The Denver Broncos went 31-28 against the Raiders.
2) The Kansas City Chiefs went 37-22 against the Raiders.
3) The Broncos swept the Raiders 12 times in that span; the Chiefs did it 13.
4) Denver was swept by the Raiders 10 times since '79; Kansas City lost both contests in the same season only half as many times.
5) Post-season results: In 1991, the Chiefs knocked off the Raiders 10-6 in the wildcard round. Two years later, Oakland stomped Denver 42-24, also in the wildcard contest. In that game, the Horse-Faced Colts Draft put 302 passing yards in the air, and 156 of them were caught by Horse Lips, a.k.a. the non-Astroglide-offering vessel of earth.

Now. The other factor is that said bomber will also likely offer a speech about the coveted 1997-98 seasons werein Brett Favre and poor Dan Reeves were wronged by the gods, so make sure you've had your juice and cookie by then, and get your cot and blankie out. It promises to be a snoozer.

But, examining those five numbered facts kinda makes one wonder: who had the heavier hand in the destruction of the Raider mystique?
Read more

Now where was I?

So you were just sitting there in your apartment in the alley next to the Circle K thinking about the House of Georges and wondering, what the heck ever happened to that one Cecil dude who used to post here? Did he give up on sports and become a Cistercian monk? Attempt an around-the-world tour by sea kayak? Find his job disappear in the recession and, facing the grim spectre of homelessness, burn his house down for the insurance cash?

Hah, no, my friends, thanks for your concern, but none of that happened--my insurance wouldn't cover it, those pencil-pushing Mussolinis haven't heard the last of me--I've actually been holed up in a Chinese cave drinking mulled wine since the end of the Buffalo game. But I've recovered and am back to offer you, oh Broncos-lovin' fools, a hearty cupful of Hope, Barry O. style, for the incipient New Year.


Although that hope will not take form in a prediction of Denver victory. There's just no way. Even the Christmas spirit--er, spirits in my case--can't make me ignore this particular oncoming bus accident.

Not only are the Chargers a more talented team, not only is their offense starting to look as it did late last year, not only are they playing at home, in the dark, where they're 3-1, but the Broncos are wearing a toilet seat of hardened, enameled Suck around their collective necks.

All there is to it. This team has no heart, no consistency, an inability to seize opportunity, safeties who couldn't play for a team of head-injured kids in the backyard of Stonymoor Special House and practice squad scrubs at tailback. The kicker doesn't vote, Mike Shanahan has evidently decided that he can show up to work in a breakaway leather cop outfit and not get fired, our most feared pass rusher is none other than Gary Coleman and Invesco Field was built on the bones of the poor, their blood as mortar.

So I expect San Diego to crank out an all-timer tomorrow, something along the AFLian lines of 56-7 or 48-3. I expect Matt Wilhelm to depants Cutler during the 3d Quarter to a hearty guffaw by the Line Judge. I expect Philip Rivers to go 20 for 20 and have enough time in the pocket to soberly contemplate his own mortality. I expect LaDainain Tomlinson to score 5 touchdowns, the last of which will come as he swims into the end zone on his elbows and knees. I expect those noble, most assuredly not-Raider-fan fans of the San Diego squad to hurl light bulbs and used syringes onto the field between plays, at least one of which will give our long snapper Hepatitis A.

The hope I mentioned earlier? That's coming in April. It's time to prep for the draft, thank fucking heavens, the one day of the professional football calendar where no one loses...except the Raiders.

Read more

Sleeping With the Enemy: Week 13, Chiefs @ Raiders

Yes, yes. Raiders week indeed and the House of Georges staff is ready for it. With us for this week's installment of "Sleeping with the Enemy" is 67MARQUEZ, who hangs his coat on the hook over at Silver and Black Pride. We sat down for a moment to discuss Al Davis, the Chiefs and Raiders, and the AFC West. Once you've read our engaging conversation, be sure to visit his site, as there's always fresh material being posted. Join is if you please, after the jump.

Bankmeister: 67MARQUEZ -- thanks so much for being with us. Kindly fill us in on your history as a Raider fan. Be as brief or extensive as you please.

67MARQUEZ: I was born and raised a Raider fan. When the team is doing well, I praise my father. When the team is not doing well, I blame my father. It's just how it goes. I've been a season ticket holder since 1997, but attended many games (pre-move to LA) and even went to a couple of games in LA. I was at the AFC Championship Game when we beat Tennessee, my all-time favorite "in-person" moment. Speaking of Dad, he's 76 and still tailgates with us. And now I'm passing my passion on to my son, who is 16 and has been to probably 40 games in his young life.

B: Excellent. I've always been a sucker for tradition. But before we get into the nuts and bolts of this game, let's talk AFC West. I trust we all share the same slice of embarrassment regarding where our once-heralded division finds us in 2008. I've been a Chiefs fan for nearly 30 years. My folks grew up Chiefs fans, and pretty much the very first thing I learned was to hate the Raiders. Now, this was simple when I began watching in the early 80s, as the Raiders -- be they the L.A. or the Oakland variety -- were a good team then, and the Chiefs were not. As the decade wore on, Denver became one tough little nugget of a franchise, so my hatred for the orange and blue grew to match that of the silver and black. By the time the 90s rolled around, however, things didn't look so good for Oakland anymore; more often than not, KC handled them, but failed miserably against the Broncos. So, Oakland kind of took back burner on my range of seethe. During this time, however, I became alarmingly aware of what the fan base, especially in the Black Hole, resembled, and as the team continued to sign, shall we say, lesser-quality character players, my spite for them was re-invigorated. San Diego and (when they resided in our division) Seattle always took a back seat. How about you? Who do you hate more: KC or Denver? Or is there another club that draws your ire even stronger?

67MARQUEZ: I would say Denver has earned my hatred more than Kansas City, but not my much. In fact, switch coaches, and well, there you go. Of course when Marty was there, I hated both the exact same. And it irked me to no end to see Marcus Allen suit up for the Chiefs.

B: Fast forward to the present day, and things look awful. I used to take a certain pride in the tough teams of our division, given that east-coast biases and television networks always favor teams like New England, Indianapolis, and the entire NFC East. Besides the simple answer of having perennial winners in the West, what needs to happen to reclaim our throne as one of the great NFL divisions?

67MARQUEZ: There's always a cycle and it's the AFC West's turn to suck right now. It seems the division is lacking two things that would make people notice: star power (not to be confused with star potential) and a return to what you touched on earlier. That genuine hatred of each other. Marty used to get so worked up over Raider Week, that he'd cry. Gruden's first goal when he got here was to restore the dominance over division opponents.

B: In my estimation, the Raiders have been a sort of league laughing stock for some time given the ridiculous club decisions that always appear to be tied to owner Al Davis. The most frequent answer/gripe I get from Raiders fans is that they just want the man to die already. Morbid as it sounds, there's likely some weight to this opinion. Do you share it? If Davis does pass, who takes over, and how will it be different?

67MARQUEZ: I am too nice of a guy to go that far. Step down? By all means, yes. Croak? No. I wonder if Billy Beane would be interested in taking over (haha). Not sure who takes over, but it would have to be someone who can stay with the times, while not forgetting what it means to represent the Raiders.

B: Let's talk roster. JaMarcus Russell. Give us the top three things this guy needs to accomplish/have to become a top NFL passer. Do you agree with this year's selection of Darren McFadden as your first overall?

67MARQUEZ: Russell needs what many QBs need: a solid line and some time to grow into the role. Many, MANY other great quarterbacks struggled at the dawn of their careers. Lastly, let him get accustomed to one coach, one system. Think Gruden/Gannon. I was pleased with the McFadden pick. I believe he has the make-up to give us that "star power" I alluded to, and he gave us a glimpse of that against the Broncos.

B: How about free-agent signings? The out-for-the-year status of Javon Walker has to hurt given the pile of money he "earned" with his signing. True or false? And Justin Fargas? He seems like a gritty back that could really produce in a good system. Are the ingredients for said system in place in Oakland for Fargas to become a top rusher?

67MARQUEZ: I think some of Davis' signings were out of desperation to bring "names" to Oakland, simply because he saw that this was not the alluring franchise it once was. There was a time that putting on a Raider uniform was football's equivalent to Yankee pinstripes. Not any more.

B: That's fair. I think I hate the Yankees as much as I hate Oakland. The defense has been perhaps the only solid bit of consistency for Oakland in the last season or two. Categorically, your team is in the top half for points scored and pass yards allowed, but nearer the bottom in total yards and rushing yards allowed. In your mind, has the defense stayed on track for this year? Has it stayed the same, improved, or taken a step back?

67MARQUEZ: While it's true the defense has been something you could pretty much hang your hat on the past couple of years, it has had its own issues with consistency this year. And they still seem to give up too many first downs on third and long. But I like what I've seen the last two weeks.

B: Then there's coaching. I'm not necessarily inclined to argue about the carousel that Davis has had going on for some time now, but I will if necessary. In my mind, Jon Gruden was the best coach that Oaktown has had since Tom Flores, and the way that Super Bowl went down had to be about the bitterest pill one could possibly swallow. Mike Shanahan might've been better had he been given the time, but that seems to be the big issue here. I didn't think Bill Callahan, Norv Turner, or a second go with Art Shell were wise decisions then, and I don't think they were now. That said, neither were even given three seasons, if I remember correctly.

I thought Lane Kiffin was a good, if nothing else different, option, but his rug was also prematurely yanked. Now you promote the offensive line coach to the level of interim? Basically, the past 10 years of the head-coaching status has baffled me, and I don't have a question really, but am interested in your thoughts on what has been, what is, and what will be in this regard.

67MARQUEZ: It's hard to tell what behind-the-scenes issues Al and Gruden had. I mention this because Al and John Madden (who was every bit as charismatic as Gruden, though in a completely different way) had, from what I can tell, a warm-and-fuzzy relationship. On the outside it seemed that Al was threatened by Gruden's popularity, but who really knows. I do know, that it has been a mess since he left. Kiffin clearly was cut out of the Gruden mold, but we never got the opportunity to see it blossom. You have to have a plan, and plans take time to develop. Bill Walsh was 2-14 his first season; Jimmy Johnson was 1-15. It helps to draft wisely, but in order for any system to succeed, you have to give it chance to fail, so long as their is progress. A coach needs to set the mood, rid the clubhouse of a losing atmosphere (look at the manager of the Tampa Bay baseball team), and then move forward with his plan. I have said all along, the wins and losses don't mean much right now; just give me a consistent effort, and a little bit of progress along the way.

B: On to the Chiefs. One and 10 says more than anyone really needs to know. As Raiders fans, it must be nice to be out of the basement for a change. How special have the wins at Denver and Kansas City been? Would it have been better, worse, or the same if those games had been against non-division rivals? Do you see any stepping stones or reasons for hope for this Chiefs team to get better? Do you have an opinion on Herm Edwards?

67MARQUEZ: OK, the part I said about wins and losses don't mean much -- well, that only applies to non-division games (and maybe games against SF and New England). Any win against an AFC West rival is special, regardless of circumstances. And on the road? Icing, my friend. I honestly don't have much to add on KC's future, but I have always liked Herman Edwards.

B: And the Thanksgiving-week game. It seems that Chiefs/Raiders games have fallen around one holiday or another frequently in recent years, which is apropos of nothing, really. But how do you see this post-Turkey Day matchup? Do the Raiders have the edge because it's at home? Is there any possibility they overlook the struggling Chiefs? Might they be still high off their win against the Broncos?

67MARQUEZ: I would think there would be some danger of a letdown Sunday, IF we were playing anyone other than the Chiefs. The Raiders actually developed a slight hint of a swagger against Denver. I imagine they liked that feeling of winning. With a post-holiday crowd urging them on, I see the Raiders winning this one.

B: Finally, give us a prediction.

67MARQUEZ: Oakland 24, KC 14.

B: Alright. I'm gonna go out on a limb with this one and say the Chiefs actually steal a road win, 34-27. Thanks, nevertheless, kind sir. It's been fun.
Read more

Tradition Tuesday: Scoping the Choncosphere, 11-25-08

This blog's rough focus? Chiefs/Broncos football? Who in da' game? Banky, Cecil, and Seven? Why two on one? 'Cause that's how them Donkey fans be. Why I keep be puttin' up with it? I's gon' be there when KC gets its first win at the 'Ves'. What, could a fan of a 1-10 team have to say leading up to Raiders and Broncos games, both on the road? Not much. That's why I be readin' what everyone else be writin', and linkin' to it, after the jump.

In all seriousness, we are less than two weeks away from The Tradition 2008, Take II. Cecil and his wife, barring any decisions to take up residence in Ireland, will be there. Seven, and his wife in bloom, have vowed to stop in Colorado Springs to purchase a grill en route. I know not why; they already own 14 of 'em. The wife and I will arrive after a flight consisting of me arguing with her about why she can't "spend Sunday shopping, whatnot since this season is awful and pointless," all of which will occur after I've given the one and only Mayor McVesco instructions on a) how to get to the stadium, b) how to do so with a complete-and-actually-checked-off checklist, c) how to rally his troops so that they may all park and partake together in the same lot, d) how to make ribs, e) the best way to properly estimate how much beer will really be needed, f) how to understand why his team is so entirely gay. I suppose I'll have to, at some point, obtain some shoes that won't leave my feet frostbitten near the famous tamale stand as well. This game will put a wrap on year eight of the Tradition, and I'll make fun of some folks for guaranteeing some stuff later. For now, here's mine: The Chiefs will have won at least one American football contest at InVesCo Field at Mile High Stadium by January 1, 2011. Hey -- they don't call me Risky Business Banky for nothing.

Let's go ahead and introduce the Derrick Thomas-for-Canton debate. Again. I personally won't waste any energy this year on this topic, because everybody else in ChiefsNation will, and then they'll be upset when he doesn't get in again. Chiefs Warpath has the list of semi-finalists for viewing.

They also have a "Top 10 Signs You're a Raiders Fan" list.

My favorite is number three:

"You watch a Chiefs-Broncos game just so you can root for injuries."

Our friend Kim at Predominantly Orange has a breakdown on the division. I don't suppose that's a good read for anyone that's a fan of AFC West teams. But it's there, and portions of the intro sum it up:

"There is a lot of heartache in the AFC West right now...Either way, it’s an ugly division, and whoever makes the playoffs will have no effect on the NFL’s playoff picture after the first round."

Ever the scoopmaster, Chris at Arrowhead Pride has published a piece with tidbits from the San Diego State community/messageboarders discussing the (practically non-existent) possibility of Herman Edwards leaving the Chiefs to coach the football team he played for in college. Oh, if only!

Anytime you make a visit to the casa de Hercules Rockefeller, you're in for some cutthroat, hilariously honest Denver Bronco assessment. After the Chiefs' week two loss at home to the Raiders, I was furious to say the least. His take on Denver's Sunday home loss to the silver and black: no different. Careful, lest you step in a pile of profanity. Or seven.

Chris Kolb drops in for his weekly rant at Arrowhead Addict. His Thanksgiving-week post examines the recent gobblings of a couple turkeys: Al Davis and Carl Peterson.

While the main course is on the table, let's talk side dishes. Ian over at BroncoTalk will contribute to this Thursday's dinner; he's bringing the stuffing:

"Denver will win against the New York Jets next weekend and I will spend this week trying to show you why. The thing is, I don’t call Denver wins, I never guarantee a win, but I promise that Denver will beat the Jets..."

My stepmom always told me not to let my eyes be bigger than my plate when it comes to serving yourself helpings at the table. I think Mr. Henson has tried to fit an entire pumpkin pie on the same plate as his entree fixins:

"When Denver has had the lead in the AFC West following Week 11 (which they do now) they’ve gone to the Super Bowl. Every time (except once) whether they won or lost that Super Bowl is another subject entirely. The only year they didn’t go on to the big game was the 1978 season."

I'm not trying to start a beef with Mr. Henson here; I simply doubt the boldness of either statement. First, no way this team beats the Jets on the road. They were obviously not clicking on all cylinders Sunday at home versus the Raiders, but while that was going on, the Jets were taking care of the then-undefeated Tennessee Titans. Now would be a good time to throw in the "anything can happen"s and the "any given Sunday"s, but I just don't see it happening. Regarding the SB quote, it's an interesting fact, one with little relevance to this season, because you might as well lump 2008 in with 1978; lead or no lead beyond week 11, Denver ain't even sniffin' the conference championship game this year.

And since we've spent a few phrases on the Raiders in this post, we might as well link to this bit on the Chargers. I suppose if you had to write on this division with regard to the entire season, I'd load up the pastry bag with pureed cranberry sauce and pipe "hard to figure out" across my plate.

And that's all I have to say about that.
Read more

Friday Fiction Fix: "Blueprint"

As I prepared to put together today's fiction fix, it occurred to me that we've only featured white male authors thus far. Naturally, a small sense of panic in the form of a question knocked on the door of my House: Do I go with a minority figure or a woman? I thought long and hard over this predicament, and came to quite the trying conclusion. But it wasn't easy.

Yeah. I pretty much said fuck it. But hold it. It's not because I don't appreciate and respect authors of other demographics. We'll get to them sooner rather than later. It's more about selecting a good piece that, in some twisted fashion, I can relate to the rough focus of this blog, which happens to be the rivalry between the Kansas City Chiefs and the Denver Broncos if you're just tuning in. And frankly, there are other figures that we've ignored for far too long. Today, with the help of Ben Marcus, we'll have a look at a credit-owed figure not named Brandon Marshall.

Ben Marcus is from Chicago. He matriculated at both New York and Brown University. He is now the head of the MFA writing program at Columbia University in the city of New York, so he's got that goin' for him, which is nice. His works include The Age of Wire and String, The Father Costume, and Notable American Women, and today we will look at a story from the latter. His writing has been called surreal fiction. It has been called post-modern, and those that choose to be annoying call it post-post-modern. I like to call it good.

"I am probably Ben Marcus.



I might be a person. There's a chance I lived on a farm meant to muffle the loud bodies of this world...



...Most likely I am still alive, suffering from a heart, unsatisfiable hands, legs that walk away.



If I had really lived, I would have been the subject of emotion-removal experiments, person-blocking strategies (PBS), attempts to zero out my heart. It may have worked. Yet somewhere in the past, a period of time called the mistake zone,



it's possible a hardened creature with black hair, wrongly taken for a dog, took a leading role with my heart, walked me through a series of steps that ended up counting as my life, then left me in some after-house...



...where I have nothing to do but issue reports."

Later on in the story...

"There should be a list of all the people who have walked the earth, or been seen breathing above it, their names and habits, the failures and successes of their hands...



...these people would once and for all be killed, so that they won't return and won't be rememberd, a complete killing in the old-fashioned style...where not only the person is killed but the things around him and any referencing devices indexing, in any way, the person: killed. In a perfect world, these people would continue being killed until a zero population had been reached, until the cities and towns and other life-viable areas and elsewhere were just empty boxes free of people...



...though we are taunted with the most believable, palpable, and beautiful characters, who, no matter how real they seem to us, ultimately fail us miserably because we...cannot fish them from fakery and thrust away all our frustration on them.





We should be able to grab whoever entices us...doctor them...dress them up or down, pose them, give them words to say that we have been waiting all of our lives to hear...



...even if they don't know what they want and have never known."



Later...

"...I still require a word of devotion, a cooing noise to comfort me...I would simply and finally be happy to be able to snap my fingers or press the Give Me What I Want button, located ideally on my own body...



...If only my head were finally not my responsibility, could be put into someone else's care, could be made to merge with other persons and the world so that it would no longer suffer such distance and touchlessness...though it would be impossible to detect whether this were ever the case...

...A person is always camoflauge for something small and soft and possibly buriable. Often he should be killed to discover what he has been aliasing,



even if it is just the most perfect thing: a person-sized piece of empty space."

It is plausible that "deciding that his own person was akin to a correctional facility for feelings, which had been placed in his body under house arrest, his body a manner of tomb, and that he was the warden of all the various ways to feel, though it should be remarked that these captured feelings were in no way rehabilitated for later release while serving time in his body. They were put away for good."

In the bitter end, "if I should exit this place heading north, please let no one care to follow me or even watch my last body as it falls from sight over the hill. I prefer not to be seen or known or discussed. I should be given a head start of a ten-count. My enemies should be blindfolded and spun in place. There should be no wolves. When my execution is planned by the people assigned to kill me, wolves should be left out of it. Let no grief circles form related to my demise."

Ben Marcus' Web site can be viewed here. Notable American Women can be purchased here.
Read more