UCONN's Streak Ends..But Was it a Set Up?

Pretty much every sports fan knows that the UCONN women's basketball team broke the late, great John Wooden's consecutive college basketball winning streak of 88 straight games last week against Florida State. They then beat Pacific to make it 90 in a row. There most recent stop was Stanford in Stanford. Stanford gave UCONN a taste of its own medicine, routing the Husky girls by 12, 71-59, and that was the end of the streak. My question is: was the UCONN schedule set up to break the streak by 2 and then lose to Stanford away? You'd be surprised to see how it looks to be that way.

If you look at UCONN's schedule, only 1 one of the 12 teams they played before facing Stanford had a shot at beating them, and that was Baylor. Baylor almost did beat them too, but UCONN made a huge comeback in the 2nd half and edged out a 65-64 victory. The game against Baylor was the second game of the season. One could say that the streak was supposed to end their, without UCONN making history, and that their victory was kind of a surprise 'hey look what we did' type thing. They squashed a big lead in that game and then came back from an 8-point deficit with about 7 minutes to go to win it. Even Coach Geno Auriemma seemed surprised after that victory as he was quoted saying: "...The improbable happened, people other than Maya (Moore) began scoring."

Stanford had a streak of their own going into their match up against UCONN. They hadn't lost a game on their home floor since March 2007, a span of 52 games, and it stayed that way once their game against UCONN ended. In fact, UCONN has never beaten Stanford in Stanford, losing all three career meetings there. Throw in the facts that in their last three meetings Stanford has led at halftime, that UCONN was down 13 early in the game and never led, which was the first time in 5 years that happened, and that Moore only had 14 points while going shooting only 33% from the field, and this game looks a little fishy.

No one will ever be able to prove if the streak was supposed to end in Stanford, but there are quite the facts to make it seem that way. Not to mention it only seems logical to lose early in the season against one of the best teams in the nation on their home court where they haven't lost in over three and a half years. I mean once they broke the streak, what was the sense in keeping it going much longer? Everybody already knows they are a dominant force. Plus it only places more pressure on the girls the longer the streak continues. In any case, the streak has ended...and I believe it did so just as planned.

References

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncw/recap?gameId=303640024
http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/team/_/id/41/connecticut-huskies
http://espn.go.com/womens-college-basketball/team/_/id/41/connecticut-huskies

The King Proclaims Contraction

Last week LeBron James talked about getting the NBA back to the way it was in the 80's, a great, less watered down NBA. The teams of the 80's has 3 or 4 superstars on each team and it made nearly every team exciting to watch. James attributes the better time to having less teams, and stated that the NBA would be better if it contracted. He mentioned the Nets and T-Wolves has teams that could be dropped. His comments caused quite a stir, but the big picture is that LeBron James is missing the big picture.

First off, the 80's were not much different than today. The same few teams were at the top of the divisions then just like now. The Finals were dominated by the Lakers and Celtics with the two combining to win 8 titles from 79-89. The two other teams to win were the Sixers and Pistons. Something similar happened this past decade except with the Lakers and Spurs. The only difference between then and now was that less teams missed the playoffs because the League was smaller.

When you compare decades, you have to consider all things involved, not just one. LeBron basically said the 80's were better because the League was smaller and it resulted in more powerhouse teams with elite players. Well alright, that was a small part of it. The 80's also had more elite players than today. I found a list of the top 50 players from the 80's and players like Patrick Ewing, Karl Malone, and Clyde Drexler didn't even crack the top 25. Of course the list was some guy's opinion, but it just goes to show that there were so many good players in the NBA in the 80's that he ranked Ewing 40th, Malone 32nd, and Drexler 26th.

The players of the 80's were not making millions of dollars to play either like players are today. It's a lot easier to put stars on the same team when they don't cost 15 million dollars a year. To what money into perspective, Larry Bird, best player of the 80's, made about 26 million throughout his entire career with the Celtics. James, arguably best player of the present, made 16 million last year alone with the Cavs. A lot of sacrifices have to be made in today's NBA if you want to build a super trio, and the Heat demonstrated this with James, Dewayne Wade, and Chris Bosh all taking less than their max.

In conclusion, lowering salaries would probably be the best option to better the NBA, not contracting. LeBron James being a player though, he wouldn't dare talk about cutting salary, and so he offered up contraction instead. When you talk about bettering anything, your going to get different options depending on where the person stands in the situation. As a star player, James said contraction because he will always have a job. An average player might say limit the number of star players on a team so that average to decent players could get a chance. As a fan, I said cut salary. A scout or coach might say let younger players come to the League faster. In the end, it will only matter what Commissioner David Stern thinks will make the League better, and he certainly knows what the big picture is.

References

http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/truehoop/miamiheat/news/story?id=5952952
http://www.shrpsports.com/nba/stand/1980finaldiv.htm
http://www.shrpsports.com/nba/stand/1981finaldiv.htm
http://www.shrpsports.com/nba/stand/1982finaldiv.htm
http://www.shrpsports.com/nba/stand/1983finaldiv.htm
http://www.shrpsports.com/nba/stand/1984finaldiv.htm
http://www.shrpsports.com/nba/stand/1985finaldiv.htm
http://www.shrpsports.com/nba/stand/1986finaldiv.htm
http://www.shrpsports.com/nba/stand/1987finaldiv.htm
http://www.shrpsports.com/nba/stand/1988finaldiv.htm
http://www.shrpsports.com/nba/stand/1989finaldiv.htm
http://forums.thesmartmarks.com/lofiversion/index.php?t56180.html
http://my.nba.com/go/thread/view/81689/22589581/Larry_Birds_Salary.....
http://www.basketball-reference.com/players/j/jamesle01.html

Waffling at Failure

The Toronto Maple Leafs currently have a losing record. One fan was quite upset with the early failures of his beloved hockey team. So upset that he threw waffles on the ice during the game at the Air Canada Centre against the Atlanta Thrashers on Monday. This act of throwing waffles was his way of protesting the team's poor performance so far. He was arrested and charged with criminal mischief. He has also been banned from the arena and two other venues that hold Maple Leaf events, BMO Field and Ricoh Coliseum.

The Maple Leafs are currently 12-17-4, with the last 4 meaning overtime losses since there are no more ties in hockey. The record itself is not really that bad, but when you here more stats things get worse. The Leafs are 4-6 in their last 10 games and have the third lowest point total in the NHL with 28. During the end of October through the the middle of the November they went on an 8-game losing streak. Their highest winning streak is 4 games, which they did the first 4 games of the season, since then they are 8-17-4. They have been shutout 6 times during this span. Every loss they have had this month has been by 3 or more goals as well.

It is certainly understandable why fans would be frustrated by the team. What I don't understand is why this fan decided to show his frustration by chucking waffles onto the ice. All I can think of is that he was personifying the saying 'waffling at success,' but people would have to think a bit before getting what he meant if this is truly what he was going for. Not to mention he probably looked like an idiot throwing waffles onto the ice and then getting arrested for doing so. Here's a bit of advice for frustrated fans reading this article: if you don't like your team's performance, then do what normal fans do and boo. It's much easier, to the point, and won't get you arrested and banned from multiple sporting venues. Literally waffling at failure is not OK people.

References

http://sports.espn.go.com/nhl/news/story?id=5948109
http://espn.go.com/nhl/team/schedule/_/name/tor/toronto-maple-leafs
http://espn.go.com/nhl/standings

Storming in with a Championship Mentality

The St. John's Red Storm men's basketball team hired a new coach in the offseason looking to get back to the NCAA Tournament. They hired Steve Lavin, the former UCLA coach who has been to many NCAA Tournaments in the past. The team was greatly hyped before the season started and everyone thought this would be the year St. John's men's basketball would be back on the map. The team is off to a 7-3 start with tough losses to St. Mary's, St. Bonaventure, and Fordham. The Johnnies are piling up tournament victories though, winning both in-season tournaments they have been in.

The first of the two was in Alaska and it was called the Great Alaska Shootout. The 8-team tournament has been held annually every Thanksgiving since 1978. The seven teams in it besides St. John's were: Arizona State, Drake, Ball State, Weber State, University of Alaska-Anchorage, Southern Utah, and Houston Baptist. St. John's played Ball State and then Drake to get to the championship game. The Ball State game was a close game with the Red Storm winning 78-73 while the Drake game was a blowout with the Red Storm winning 82-39. The Johnnies played Arizona State in tournament finale, beating them 67-58. This was St. John's first tournament win since 2005.

The second of the two happened over the last couple of days in New York City at Madison Square Garden. The tournament is called the Holiday Festival at MSG. This tournament is small and consisted of Davidson, St. Francis (NY), and Northwestern besides St. John's. St. John's beat Davidson on Monday, 62-57, to advance to the championship game. Unbeaten Northwestern also made it to the final. But facing an undefeated opponent did not phase the Red Storm as they won their first Holiday Festival since 2005, 85-69.
It was the first time St. John's won two in-season tournaments since the legendary Lou Carnesecca led the then-Redmen to victories at the Lapchick Memorial and Cougar Classic.

The Johnnies have 7 wins overall, 5 of them coming in tournaments. They are currently unbeaten during tournament play and they look great during games that matter. This could bode well for the team when they face the other teams of the tough Big East, which currently boasts 5 teams in the Top 10. This is starting to look like the year St. John's goes somewhere in the men's basketball category of sports. If they keep up this championship mentality, then there is no stopping them.

References

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Alaska_Shootout#Men.27s_Tournament
http://espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=303292599
http://espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=303302181
http://espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=303312599
http://espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=303542599
http://espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=303552599

Destination of Donovan McNabb

Donovan McNabb's days of running the Washington Redskins offense are over this year, and maybe forever. Head coach Mike Shanahan has benched him for the rest of the season in order to look at the other quarterbacks on the roster. McNabb will not even be the backup either. He will be placed 3rd on the depth chart behind Rex Grossman, the new starter, and John Beck. McNabb has struggled mightily this year and the Redskins cannot make the playoffs, and so Shanahan has decided to use the final three games to evaluate Grossman and Beck.

McNabb has had a miserable season this year. His numbers look like those of his rookie season as a Philadelphia Eagle a decade ago, except with more interceptions. This year he has a career-high 15 picks compared to only 14 touchdowns. If it is true that he will not play again this year, it will be the first time in his career that he finished with more picks than scores. His passer rating is also a career-low 77.1. The only stat that looks right for McNabb this year is his passing yards. He totaled 3,377 this year, which is good for 4th best over his 12 year career. It is unclear whether his poor year is because of a downgrade in players around him or if he has started his decline.

McNabb has not reached the age of no return as three of the elite quarterbacks are over 30 years old with 2 of them being the same age as McNabb, 34. The three QB's I'm referring to are Tom Brady, Peyton Manning, and Drew Brees. Manning and Brees are each having fine years at ages 34 and 31. Brady is having a phenomenal year posting numbers similar to his career year in 2007 and he is also age 34. The common factor that Brady, Manning, and Brees have that McNabb doesn't is that they have plenty of weapons to go to. In New England, everybody knows about Welker and Branch, but besides them Brady also has two good rookie tight ends and a receiver-back that has also proved to be quite useful. In Indianapolis, Manning has Wayne and Garcon, and usually more if injuries didn't take down Dallas Clark and Austin Collie. But backups Jacob Tamme and Blair White have proved to be viable options in place of those two. In New Orleans, Brees has Colston, Meachem, Henderson, Moore, and Thomas along with two viable tight ends. But in D.C., McNabb only has veterans Santana Moss and Chris Cooley. He also has young receiver Anthony Armstrong, but he really is only a deep threat. Donovan McNabb simply does not have the firepower to put up good numbers, not to mention a shaky line that has allowed him to be sacked 37 times.

Last month  McNabb signed a 5-year, 78 mil extension with the Redskins and said he could see himself playing for the Redskins for the rest of his career. But that can be easily disregarded because the only guarantees of the extension was that McNabb got a 3.5 million dollar raise this year. There is a clause in the contract that allows the Skins to cut McNabb at any point before next season and all financial obligations will be dropped. With Shanahan telling McNabb that he may not be on the team next year, you can rest assure he will not be on the roster for the 2011 Skins. This immediately brings up the question, where is McNabb's next destination?

There are plenty of teams that need a QB, like: Seattle, Carolina, Buffalo, San Fran, and Minnesota. Tennessee, Oakland, and the New York Jets could also be possible suitors. If teams look at this as a fluke year because of little talent on Washington's offense, then McNabb may be in for quite the payday. But if teams look at this year as the start of his decline, then he will probably only get a 1 or 2 year contract paying him modest money. Regardless of how much he gets paid, if he becomes a free agent, the media will be all over it. The sports world could very well see three straight seasons of dominated by one free agent. First it was the Summer of LeBron, then the Winter of Lee followed, and it looks like the next stop on this wild ride is the Spring of McNabb.

References

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5929516
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=1753
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=2330
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=1428
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/profile?playerId=2580

Phil-Lee Bound

Cliff Lee made his decision about where he will be playing the next several seasons a few days ago. The hottest pitching commodity of this season took himself all the market by signing a 5-yr 120 million contract to play for the Philadelphia Phillies. The New York Yankees and Texas Rangers were thought to be the front runner to sign Lee, but the Phils decided to get into involved recently and it did not take very long Lee to agree after the offer was made. Yankees and Rangers fans are probably pissed right now that Lee took the deal worth the least amount of money, but they are just bitter because he won't be pitching for their teams. Let's find out if Lee chose the right team.

Lee himself was officially introduced yesterday to the Phillies. In his press conference he said all the right things. He said it wasn't about who could pay him the most. He wasn't afraid to pitch in New York or angry about the spitting incident, which he doesn't believe happened. He said it was about him and his family being comfortable, and winning championships. He liked Philadelphia during his first go around, and never wanted to leave. He understood being traded though and thought he'd never have the chance to return. So when the opportunity presented itself, of course he was willing to take less money to return to the city he loved playing in.

In the baseball sense it was also a very smart idea. The Phils already have a superb core of starters of Halladay, Oswalt, and Hamels. They have a great offense and a solid bullpen too. This team just jumps off the page at you before even re-adding Cliff Lee to it. Throw in the fact that Cliff Lee has one of the lowest ERAs at Citizens Bank Field, and it becomes a no-brainer. Cliff Lee and the Philadelphia Phillies are probably the most perfect fit for a player and a team that baseball has seen in quite some time. No matter how many people don't like it, Lee is Philly-bound and he might have just ensured the Phillies to be World Series-bound.

References

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5923327

New Knicks - It's A'mare!

In the offseason, the New York Knicks obtained Amare Stoudamire from the Phoenix Suns and signed point guard Raymond Felton, who played for the Charlotte Bobcats. The Knicks hoped that acquiring Stoudamire and the lure of the city would be enough for LeBron James to sign in New York. James, however, had different plans, and the whole world knows that story. Turns out the Knicks didn't need James, they were just fine with what they had.

They started off looking like the Knicks of old going 3-8, including a 6-game losing streak ending with a 120-118 heartbreaking loss to the Denver Nuggets. But since that loss the Knicks are 13-1. They're on a eight-game win streak for the first time in 16 years. Amare Stoudamire has scored 30+ points in all eight games of the streak, and Raymond Felton has blossomed into one of the premiere point guards in the league averaging 18.3 points per game and 8.4 assists per game. Their last game was yesterday against the very same Nuggets that handled them their 6th straight loss almost a month ago. This time the Knicks held on to win another close game between the two, 129-125. The Knicks won a lot more than just the game though.

It is reported that the Nuggets, Carmelo Anthony, who has been at the center of trade rumors since the offseason, has told team officials that he will not sign his extension unless he gets traded to the Knicks. The Knicks were always thought to be the team Anthony wanted to be traded to. This win and the run the Knicks are on have made Anthony come out and say it though. It is unknown if the Nuggets are willing to grant Anthony his wish and trade him to the Knicks. But what is known is that the Knicks are back. The Knicks are back and have gotten the fresh start they have been looking for years, and it's all because of a man named Amare.

References

http://espn.go.com/nba/team/schedule/_/name/ny/new-york-knicks
http://espn.go.com/nba/team/stats/_/name/ny/new-york-knicks
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/recap?gameId=301212018

What a Joke: Favre Investigation

The situation between Brett Favre and Jenn Sterger was first broke by a website called deadspin.com. I don’t know if you’ve ever been on it, but the site looks like one you could easily discredit if you ask me. Even they said they weren’t sure if it was Brett Favre’s voice on the voicemails. They never cared if it was him or not. They were breaking that story if the voice sounded nothing like Favre’s because they knew it would give their site mega publicity. Besides, they were more interested in getting out that Favre sent inappropriate text messages to her anyways.

Now Favre refused to confirm or deny anything to the media before or after talking to NFL officials about the incident. It was even reported that he refused to meet with the NFL the initial time they wanted to talk to him. Favre did give one of his patented teary-eyed apologies to the Vikings organization and fans for the distraction he caused though. We then found out that Favre admitted that he had left voicemails to Sterger, but did not send her any inappropriate text or picture messages.

Sterger contemplated for a very long time on whether to talk to NFL officials about the Brett Favre allegations. I find it interesting that she did decide to talk to them a few days after her show was canceled on Versus. She then met with the NFL officials for three hours, which is weird because telling her side of the story should not have taken three hours. It was never disclosed what she said, funny how that worked; what Favre says is out mere hours after his meeting but what Sterger said to this day is still not out.

Sterger’s lawyer recently said that the NFL has finished their investigation and that all the evidence and materials are sitting on Goodell’s desk to look at. Quite frankly at this point I don’t see why Goodell would even look at them. Favre has already said he will not come back next year and that he will be retiring for good. This means that there will be no way that Goodell can punish Favre besides maybe suspending for the last three games of the year. He could also suspend him for next year in case he decided to come back for a 21^st year. But if Favre found out he would be suspended next year, he would just say he was retiring anyways and that it doesn’t matter to him.

Sterger’s lawyer also recently said that Favre will retire after this year to escape trouble from the League. I found this to be hysterical because Favre announced way before this story even broke that this would be his last year. I remember he said something about not planning to play in the League for 20 years and that it was just a coincidence that he’s retiring after 20. He said this during his press conference back in August that was held after he made the decision to return for the final year of his Vikings contract.

I personally don’t think Goodell will punish Favre at all. The situation has dragged on for so long that people actually stopped talking about it, and when people forget that means the NFL’s reputation is not being run through the mud. Favre has also brought a lot of good publicity over the years for the NFL as well. He is a legend who has almost every qb record there is, and has led his teams to countless 4^th quarter comebacks. His wavering over retirement for the last several years has grown old, but I don’t think Goodell holds that against Favre. I think Goodell honestly believes Favre wavered for all these years because it has been a tough decision to come back and play each offseason. In the end, this story will simply result in more Favre jokes and will be a funny story to look back and laugh at, nothing more.

The Old vs. New: Woods Fails, Westwood Prevails

The old number 1 golfer in the world and the new number 1 golfer in the world both played last weekend. They weren't in the same tournament, and it is a shame they weren't because both golfers lead going into the final day. Tiger Woods was playing at his own tournament in Thousand Oaks, California, the Chevron World Challenge, for the first time since 2007. Lee Westwood participated in the Nedbank Golf Challenge in Sun City, South Africa. By the end of the final day, Woods was fighting for victory in a playoff with Graeme McDowell while Westwood cruised to victory. The difference between the former and current best golfer in the world? Mechanics.


Tiger Woods went into the final day with a four stroke lead over McDowell. He struggled from the start bogeying on two of the first three holes. He had a birdie in between those bogeys though and birdied again on hole 5 and seemed to regain control parring up to hole 13. Hole 13 was Wood's downfall as he double bogeyed it and fell from the lead. He then birdied Hole 18 to salvage the tie out of a miserable day. McDowell hit two long birdies to beat him in the playoff though. Woods' failure is widely attributed to bad form he had gained from being away so long. He had reverted back to his old ways for most of the tournament, which is why he was leading. But golfing experts saw the flawed form come back into play, and it was clearly visible what they were talking about. Former golfer Paul Azinger tweeted this Sunday while watching: "Tiger reverting back a bit today. When he starts to keep left elbow pointing down again, on bcksw/and after impact he'll stop pulling shots!" This is obviously refers to his swing form and that his elbow is sliding out during the swing, which causes the ball to pull to the right. Woods will need to go a whole tournament without letting his elbow slip if he wants to win again.


Taking a complete 360, all Lee Westwood needs to do to win is to enter a tournament. Westwood dominated the field in Sun City, South Africa at the Gary Player Country Club, which is said to be one of the harder courses requiring both stamina and accuracy to succeed. Well Westwood had both working over the weekend and you only need to look at the stats to prove it. Westwood ranked first in birdies with 21 as well as greens in regulation, hitting 75%. He was also second in driving accuracy with 57.14%. His Round 2 and 4 scores were either the best or tied for the best on the day. Westwood's only real blip was Round 3 when he hit a 71. Westwood finished at 17 under, which was better than second place finisher, Tim Clark, by nine strokes.


With Tiger Woods seemingly on the cusp of winning again and Westwood proving that he should be number 1 in the world, it will be interesting to see if a battle for number 1 between Woods and Westwood occurs over the course of next year. Such a battle would be great for golf because Woods would be quite the comeback story and Westwood is playing so well that if Woods retakes number 1 it will be even more astonishing. Golf has not really seen a battle for number 1 since Woods and Vijay Singh battled for it back in 2005. Woods won the battle and has been number 1 ever since Westwood overtook him on October 31th, the longest streak of being number 1 ever. If the past are any indications, Woods would win a battle for first if one does happen in 2011. The battle would be great all the same though considering what Woods is coming back from this time. The battle would truly be a battle of old versus new.


References


http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/news/story?id=5888817
http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/news/story?id=5887260
http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/players/scorecards?playerId=462
http://sports.espn.go.com/golf/leaderboard
https://twitter.com/#!/PaulAzinger
http://www.nedbankgolfchallenge.com/content.aspx?id=20706&cat=NGCHistory
http://www.nedbankgolfchallenge.com/scorecard.aspx?id=68
http://www.nedbankgolfchallenge.com/leaderboard.aspx
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_Woods

Werth's Worth

It was announced today that outfielder Jayson Werth agreed to a deal with the Washington Nationals for 7 years, 126 million dollars. Apparently not many people like this deal though. ESPN's Buster Olney has reported that general managers across baseball are 'going nuts over the deal.' ESPN's SportsNation asked it's Facebook fans about the deal, and the result was loud and definitive: Nats wasted a lot of money. I want to know why everyone is against this deal. Werth has been one of the centerpieces of the Phillies offense the last three years that made it to back-to-back World Series, winning one of them. This past season they made it to the NLCS, as well, and lost to the eventual champions, the San Francisco Giants. His stats have been eye-popping as well considering he never got a chance before the Phillies. Yet, nobody seems to think Werth deserves the money.

Yankee first baseman Mark Teixeira had put up similar numbers to Werth before signing his deal and no one made a fuss about that, which was worth about 60 million more and one year longer than Werth's by the way. Teixeira is not much better than Werth either. He only has more homers because he played in the small confines in Texas. Adrian Gonzales, San Diego Padres' first baseman, is also said to make Teixeira money and that is also widely accepted as a good deal for him. Gonzales is also not that much better than Werth. Werth is a great baseball player, and is not a distraction off the field. I don't see why him getting paid is causing such an uproar.

I understand that this deal is literally worth more than the Nationals have spent on any free agent over the last 20 years according to ESPN reporter Jayson Stark, but that doesn't mean they overpaid for him. At some point, the Nationals were going to pay big money for somebody, why not it be Jayson Werth? He has proven himself over the last three years with the Phillies as a reliable starting outfielder than can hit for both average and power. He has proven that he is a down-to-Earth, low maintenance guy that will do what is asked of him (just look at the first few years of his career). He has nothing left to prove. Let's face it. Jayson Werth is worth every penny of his new contract and everyone knows it.

References

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=5888329
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=4262
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=4937
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/players/stats?playerId=5405
http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=3790141

Plax 2011 Comeback Story?

Plaxico Burress accidentally shot himself in the leg almost two years ago (the exact anniversary was two days ago). Normally that wouldn't be a problem; stuff happens. Burress did not have a permit to be carrying around that go though, and so it became a problem. He turned himself in and accepted a deal that put him away for two years with an additional two years supervision. He is set to be release next June, and his agent has already said he will be able to make training camp for whatever team eventually picks him up. Burress is a wide receiver who started for the Steelers and Giants before the incident happened. What's not known is where Burress will go or how well he will do once he returns.

Plenty of NFL teams could use a 6 foot 5 receiver with 9 years experience. Off the top of my head, the Rams, Seahawks, Redskins, Bucs, 49ers, Bears, and Panthers could all use a tall, veteran receiver, and I'm sure you could make a case for more teams as well. Questions about his age will come into play though and his character. The gun incident isn't the only thing he's done as he has quite the laundry list of legal troubles. At the same time, if Michael Vick was given a shot, then Burress should easily get his. He just has to prove he has something left in the tank to give, which goes back to age. Burress will be 34 next August and that is pretty old for a NFL receiver. Terrell Owens is older than that and having a career year in Cincinnati though.

Age is not the only factor of performance though. The team, coach, money, motivation, etc. are all other reasons that effect performance. Chances are Burress will not be the focal point of whatever team signs him, but he could serve as a number 2 in an offense that already has a clear number 1. In this situation he would reap the benefits of lax coverage because defenses are focusing on the number 1 receiver. Going into a run or pass offense is virtually a crap shoot depending on who picks him up; obviously he would rather go into a pass offense to get more targets. A team will probably only sign him for 1 year at the veteran's minimum, which would be 745,000 for Burress not counting a signing bonus. Michael Vick did make 1.6 million his first year returning to the NFL from prison though, but he returned to the NFL at age 30 as a quarterback, a position that can be played much longer than receiver. Money and years will depend on how he does trying out for each team. I would think Burress would be motivated enough to play well if he got the chance due to the fact that he will probably want to prove he is still one of the better receivers in the league.

In my opinion, Burress will have a good year next year if he gets a chance. Michael Vick has shined since getting his chance in the spotlight, and he was away from football longer than Burress will be when he returns. I think coaches should look at Vick's success and immediately assume Burress will have that type of success. Burress, like Vick, does not want to have the negative image that he is viewed now. He will want to get back to the way things were, being a good football player. If he shows that he is ready to play, his coach should start him right away. There really is nothing to lose by starting Burress because he is so tall that he will be able to catch balls even if he is slower or doesn't run routes as well. There isn't a starting cornerback in the NFL that is 6 foot 5, and so Burress will always have the size advantage. To me, if Burress shows he still has some speed and decent hands then I think he should start next season for a team. Will he be the next comeback story? Only time will tell.

References

http://espn.go.com/blog/nfceast/post/_/id/22147/plaxico-burress-eyes-2011-return
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/players/stats?playerId=2139
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaxico_Burress#Legal_troubles