The Observer, January 28, 2005
Volume XXXVII, Issue 15
Smack Talk
Question 1: Will Terrell Owens make the difference for the Eagles in Super Bowl XXXIX?
Todd Jacobs: Owens will be the difference. He is among the top two receivers in the NFL and strengthened the Eagles offense during the regular season. Since he has gone down, however, players like Brian Westbrook and Freddie Mitchell have had to step up. They did a great job against the poor defenses the Eagles faced, but those defenses were still able to man up against the next guy down. For example, Antoine Winfield of the Vikings covered Brian Westbrook, but if the Vikes had tried that with Owens, they would have been punished. If Owens had been in there, the coverage would have shifted towards him, leaving Westbrook open. Even if the stats don't show it after the Eagles win the Super Bowl, Owens will have still been a key factor.
Shardule Shah: No, T.O. will not be the difference. First of all, he will be playing with an injury similar to Steve Smith's of the Panthers. Steve Smith began to walk without discomfort last week, and he suffered his injury in November. Owens will be nowhere near 100 percent. I see him being used as a mere decoy, the same purpose Randy Moss served while he played injured. Even with that in mind, the Patriots do not bother with the man-to-man coverage schemes like the Falcons and Vikings foolishly employed. They play the man-zone defense, in which corners and linebackers throw receivers off their routes, while other defensive backs and linebackers play zone coverage. This will limit the effectiveness of T.O. and Bryan Westbrook in open space, because it is not the responsibility of one man to cover these guys. It is the team's responsibility, and we all know the Patriots play and win as a team. Moreover, do I need to mention the fact that the Patriots' Asante Samuel, Randall Gay, and Troy Brown have stopped the likes of Marvin Harrison, Brandon Stokley, Reggie Wayne, Hines Ward, and Plaxico Burress in the last two weeks? On a final note, I would hold your horses about "after the Eagles win." Check the Las Vegas line.
TJ: I'll take the +7. The Eagles crushed teams before with Owens in there, including a big game versus the Ravens. I don't see why it can't happen again. I think Owens is a better big-play receiver than any of those guys mentioned and deserves more attention. You can't argue that the Patriots won't be looking at Owens more than any of the receivers you mentioned, playing or not. As Owens attracts the attention of New England\'s defense, players like Westbrook and Donovan McNabb will receive less attention and consequently be able to make more plays. Those are a lot of weapons after one of the top threats in the NFL. You act like your "team" has twice as many guys on defense as they do. You can't be perfect against this great passing game as you think you are... and then stop the run game. It's not possible.
SS: Frankly, the offense of the Colts, with three top-notch WRs, an elite RB, and two good TEs scared me much more than the Eagles' offense, which essentially contains Brian Westbrook, underachieving Freddie Mitchell, a frail Todd Pinkston (Pinkston and Mitchell combined for an astonishingly low 33 yards Sunday), and streaky tight ends. The Eagles offense is nothing but a bunch of loose parts put together by Andy Reid and Donovan McNabb. Surely, Bill Belichick will think of ways to defeat this sorry bunch of boys.
Question 2: Who is the NBA's MVP at this time?
SS: Steve Nash is clearly the NBA's MVP right now. Phoenix jumped out to a 31-4 start because of his ability to push the ball up the floor and guide an explosive offense. You may argue that Steve Nash has an explosive offense to work with, but unless Nash runs it, it is not nearly as effective. In fact, when Nash was injured recently, the Suns lost five straight games. Without him, the Suns' offense is completely ineffective. He is leading the league in assists, and is among the league leaders in assist/turnover ratio. Must I add that he is the only major addition to the same team that went 29-53 one year ago? When you watch him play, you know the game speeds up. The Suns are leading the league in scoring, averaging 108 points per game. Last year, they averaged 94. To turn a sad bunch of individuals into a winning team only spells out three letters: M-V-P!
TJ: Let me just say that he is surrounded by great players, and losing a couple of games without him in the lineup doesn't really mean that his absence was the sole reason for the losses. I also want to add that they added Quentin Richardson along with Nash, who is a great offensive player with a solid perimeter threat. Anyway, you are correct with one thing: Nash does run the court really well, and he does have the most assists in the NBA. You are forgetting one thing when you talk Steve Nash:complete player. Let me bring up a hometown favorite, LeBron James. James is having his best season yet, leadinghis team to first place, and it's hard to argue that it is not because of him. He is surrounded by nothing better than role players and only makes them better. LeBron himself is getting better as the season goes on, too, judging by the fact that he had the first two triple doubles of his career last week. He also has averaged 25 points, 7.5 assists, and seven rebounds per game during the first half of the season. His defense has improved too, as he ranks second in steals in the NBA. Lebron also puts in the minutes, averaging 41 per game, whereas Nash averages 34. If Nash means so much to his team, why doesn't he play more?
SS: All I can say is this: When you take the fuel out of the fire, it's pretty hard for something to burn.
TJ: I don't really know what the hell that means. I know one thing though: I'd rather look like LeBron James than Steve Nash.
Question 3: Which is the better TV show: The OC on Fox or Tilt on ESPN?
TJ: Sure, there are lots of hot girls on The OC, and sure, a few of them might turn out to be lesbians. But why are you watching for that on TV for anyway? If you are looking for that, then why watch once a week when you can go onto the Case network? I hear some people use it four times a day.The OCis just a bad chick-flick turned into a bad drama series. If that's for you, then that is fine. However, for someone who writes a sports column and is in love with Tom Brady, who is a male model by the way,I am very surprised. One of the most manly and tough-guy moviesI can think of, is Rounders. Tilt is by the creators of Rounders and is very similar except it is split up into segments. Besides, there still is a hot girl in this one for you, and it's on ESPN. Hot girl + poker + ESPN = a HIT. Forget that drama series on FOX.
SS: Now that you've taken a few shots at my masculinity, let me bring some common sense back into the discussion, something "real men" like you apparently lack. First off, The OC is a well-written drama, unlike predecessors such as Dawson's Creek. It has received consistently high ratings over the course of nearly two consecutive years. If people were turned off by the writing in a drama, they would have switched the channel by now. Dramas do not last without good writing. Tilt is merely the World Series of Poker with some staged drama. If I wanted to play poker, I would just call my friends over, and maybe, if an attractive female showed up, ESPN would film us and turn it into a TV series. What a cool idea that would be! I don't know about you, but frankly, I'd rather watch the loads of attractive females in The OC to the one in Tilt. Where's your manhood now?
