What Does the Preseason Mean?

What can we take from preseason NFL football? Can we accurately see what teams are going to be dominant? Are we given a glimpse of teams destined to dwell in the cellar all year? Does anybody really know what to expect? The answers are mostly yes but it can be deceiving at times. It's hard to tell what to take to the bank each preseason.

It's difficult because we don't really know how seriously each team is taking each exhibition game. Of course every team wants to be sharp and clicking but this team might take out first-teamers before the other, and this team might be resting a few offensive linemen against this team's stellar D-line. It goes on like that.

I haven't sat and watched entire preseason games. I've checked out a half or two of various teams, to get my fix and start forming opinions. But I'm not going to sit there and watch the 4th quarter of the Jags and Bucs - I have standards and a life. A few quarters in the second and third games is enough to open your eyes to certain things.

Some observations I've picked up:

• Favre should have played more than four snaps versus SF in the second game. He's rusty as hell. He needs, and wants, snaps. Chili got scared after Willis and Spikes drove him into the ground and pulled him. Keep him out there. In the next game, he plays into the third quarter, throwing hail marys and trying to jam throws into places that have no chance - just to do it. To get loosened up, see where he's at.
• Camarillo looks decent - as a possession receiver but you can't send him down the sideline like Sidney Rice. The lack of deep threat will hinder Favre greatly at the start of the year. (Berrian doesn't count, he's not good.)
• The Bears and Cutler are going to struggle again. He can't stay upright. Cutler will be frustrated. Martz will be pissed and the Bears will flounder. Oh, and Urlacher has already went down with another injury.
• The Packers offense, certainly the passing game, is firing on all cylinders. Rodgers could be the MVP this year if the Pack when the division and make a run. The defense is still a big question mark.
• Derek Anderson should start the season for Arizona. Leinart looked awful and doesn't look comfortable out there running the team. But Leinart will certainly have a chance to start some where along the line. The Cards could be in for a long one.
• The Cowboys offense has looked TERRIBLE. This one gives me trouble. They can't be that bad, can they? If you go off the preseason, the Cowboys won't make the playoffs and finish under .500. But that can't be the case, right? I refuse to think so but maybe the O-line is really going to hold them back.
• The Jets look pretty good, but Sanchez hasn't played well. This one I also ignore because of the defense and run game. They're just getting him more reps.
• The Raiders must have a great defense, according to the preseason. The shut down the Cowboys and were crushing Cutler.

All of those things could mean something, or nothing. That's what I struggle with when watching preseason football. The more you watch, the more you can out-think yourself when trying to determine predictions. Maybe I wasn't watching the right games, at the right time. Bottom line: Believe half of what you see and a third of what you hear in the preseason. Injuries are the only certainties in preseason football.

What I do know is the NFL needs to keep all four preseason games. Keep the schedule the way it's always been, billionaire owners. Please don't try to tell me "the fans have clearly spoken and they don't want preseason games." It's about preparation for the season, not trying to sell out the stadium two more times.

End Note

The new positioning of the umpire has caused me to question this new rule change. The umpire is now in the offensive backfield, not behind linebackers, for safety reasons. If the quarterback runs a no-huddle offense, he now has to wait until the umpire spots the ball and waddles back 10 yards to his position. This has already gotten Peyton Manning heated, as he was called for two "illegal snap" penalties during the Packers/Colts game last Thursday.

It appears to be strictly put in to give the defense a few more seconds to get set-up. Why are the refs trying to favor one side or the other? Spot the ball and let them play - not spot the ball, wait five seconds, signal to the QB it's okay to hike the ball, then play.

It seems unnecessary and will take away from certain teams. Here's former NFL VP of Officiating Mike Pereira's breakdown of the new rule.

About a week away now.

Coming up next week here on The Jevne Sports Journal: Division-by-division predictions for the 2010 season. Thanks for reading and sticking with me.

Tiger Far From Finished

He just needs some more time.

Tiger shot a career-worst 18-over par this weekend on a course he's always dominated. He's bottomed out on the course. His game and swing are in the gutter with his personal life, marriage, reputation and image. It's never looked worse for Tiger Woods.

But it's always darkest before the dawn. His current turmoil is just a road block for Tiger. Not even that, just road construction. He needed a lot of work done after speeding down sport and celebrity's Autobahn of riches, women and power. Potholes are plentiful and dangerous there.

Last Thanksgiving was the arbitrary date when his dark side got exposed. That cat was getting out of the bag at some point. Tabloid covers were coming eventually. On top of that, covering tracks and behavior was unhealthy for Tiger personally. Whoring around at every turn, addicted to sex and the power he had with sex.

Problems would form eventually whether the press got ahold of it or it just tore him up personally. The media just hit fast forward on the whole thing. Blew it up, sped it up and threw it up. He may have been able to hide it until he's 40 but what then? All this happens in five years and it's probably uglier. Now in five years, he'll be in a completely different place with a different mindset and he'll be killing it on the Tour again.

So he's about to be 35 in December, with 14 majors. Four behind Jack. The record is still so within reach it's not even an issue in my mind. There are 17 majors before he turns 40. I really like Tiger's odds to win three out of those 17 even with none this year or next. Then it's just two from 40 on.

Tom Watson should have a won a major last year at 59. Tiger will have plenty of golf in him from 40 to 50. So he wins one major every couple of years, big deal. He only needs five more. And I know it's easy to say, "only five more" but, with Tiger, you can. He takes care of his body, physically, better than most on Tour so longevity shouldn't be an issue.

We all thought he'd smoke Jack's record early but it's just not going to happen in that time frame. That was a huge pothole he hit last year and you have to know it will cause damage and delay the arrival at the destination. In this instance, the destination is 19 major championships and Greatest of All-Time.

The only way Tiger doesn't break Jack Nicklaus' record is if he retires from competitive golf and doesn't play in the tournaments. Don't dump your Tiger stock. I'm loading up right now while it's at a garage-sale price and riding it for the next 15 years.

Celtics Fueling Up with Diesel

The Diesel is going green. Boston signed Shaq to a two-year deal today in hopes of boosting its front court with size and stature. The deal is said to be worth around $3 million. The Celtics and Shaq may need each other but neither should expect a ring next year.

The facts of the case are pretty straight forward, and breaking them down, this deal makes sense. The Celtics needed another center with Kendrick Perkins possibly being out until February coming off ACL surgery.

True, it makes the Celtics older but Shaq is a very comparable solution to losing Perkins. Of course Shaq can't defend the screen/roll as well, but his defense, based on strength alone, will hinder most other centers, including fake Superman in Orlando. And even at this stage, Shaq's more of an offensive threat than Perkins. He's still shoot over 56%.

The big question mark is how Shaq will react to a reduced bench role. He may get some starts along the way but he is going to be asked to come off the bench at some point. How will that affect Shaq's mentality? He was the MDE (Most Dominant Ever). He's never came off the bench before. Perhaps with a distinguished franchise like Boston's, with its Hall of Famers in place, it won't be an issue. I have to think Shaq has planned for this before signing, therefore will accept.

As much as I want to say "Shaq, retire! You're making people forget how great you were!" I won't. I won't dwell on how this is his sixth team and can't stay anywhere more than a year now. I'm actually excited to see him playing for another contender, especially Boston, who I follow closely. Along with Sir Charles and Kobe, Shaq completes my top-three list of all-time favorite players in NBA history, so I have a fan-element to Shaq. He can play as long as he wants. I've loved following his career, and will continue doing so, despite his inabiltiy to run quickly up the court.

However, I must now point out how strongly I feel that the Celtics will NOT win the title next year. They will contend and contend hard, too many great players not to. And Doc Rivers knows what he's doing, I'm pretty convinced of that, but it's past Boston's time. I like the move, but it's not going to pay off with a ring. Don't have the youth among its great players and signing Jermaine O'Neal and Shaq is a sign they're grasping at straws.

Quick numbers on Shaq

Career: 24.1 ppg  11.0 reb 35.7 min.
Last 3 years: 14.7 ppg  7.6 reb  27.3 min.

(photo: Tony Dejak, AP)

Favre Frenzy

There's something about Favre that makes people lose their minds. We've all been down this road three times now and people are still going crazy over "reports" about Favre's decision making. I thought we covered all this last year. Even Favre doesn't know what the hell he's going to do. Certainly not right now.

The reports by the Star Tribune, ESPN and everyone else really makes me question how diligent these people are checking their sources. They were reporting Favre had "notified the Vikings he would not return." If you look closer it was some text message to an unnamed teammate that was the source.

Vishante Shiancoe told the StarTrib Favre "told a couple guys on the team he was going to retire." I need more than a mystery text message from a third or fourth party to confirm the decision of the most indecisive person in sports history.

They asked Childress. Of course he hadn't heard a thing about it, only saying the situation "is fluid," whatever that means. Steve Mariucci brought some sense to the discussion, claiming he talked to Favre who was, of course, shocked by all the fuss but said he never made such a decision.

Favre saying he's retiring in a off-the-record text message, allegedly, on August 3 doesn't hold any weight in the 2010 Favre Watch. It's much too early. He didn't join the team until August 17 last year. It's going to be later than that this year.

Calm down, Viking fan. No need to get anxious about battling around .500 with TJack behind center just yet. Favre Watch is far from over. As Rich Eisen said, "It's a marathon, not a sprint."

Bottom Bengals

Ochocinco says the Bengals are going to win the Super Bowl. Ocho is just good at getting people worked up. The 2010 Bengals, with their new circus act T.O., won't be sniffing the Super Bowl this year. They won't even be sniffing the playoffs.

It's not just TO coming in causing a media circus. He and Ocho are now "Bonnie and Clyde" and "Batman and Robin." Maybe on the reality TV circuit. If they want to get attention with their shenanigans, fine. Yuck and laugh it up. Make outrageous claims like how not winning the Super Bowl will be a "shame."

It's more than just two media whores that will keep the Bengals from the playoffs this year. It's the team's history. It's the schedule. It's last year. It's the team. Don't buy what Ocho is selling.

If you look at the Bengals under Marvin Lewis, who is entering his 8th year, you'll notice a trend of mediocrity. Not that Lewis is entirely to blame but he hasn't come close to producing back-to-back teams worth a damn.

Under Lewis:
2003: 8-8
2004: 8-8
2005: 11-5, won division
2006: 8-8
2007: 7-9
2008: 4-11-1, man that tie is an eye sore.
2009: 10-6, won division

Based on that history, the Bengals will be, at best, 8-8. The 2005 team was even better than last year's team, yet the following year they underachieved. And they had a much more potent offense in '05.

Now you have to look at their schedule for this year. It's the fourth-toughest in the league, based on opponent's record from 2009. Here are some noteworthy games: Week 1: @ New England.  Week 10: @ IND. Week 12: @ NYJ. Week 13: vs. NO. Week 16: vs. San Diego. Plus the divisional schedule.
Last year they went 6-0 vs. the AFC North. Does anybody think that could miraculously happen again? There is no way in hell they sweep their division again. Pittsburgh and Baltimore will definitely have something for them this year. Cleveland might even be able to pull one out on them. I say 3-3 in division this year, maybe 2-4.

The Bengals have too many people gunning for them this year. They are playing a first-place schedule. Teams want revenge. Teams don't want them back in the playoffs, especially Pittsburgh. The Bengals got a little too full of themselves last year and this off-season. Now they have Ocho predicting them to the Super Bowl.

One more thing: Carson Palmer is overrated. He's not in the elite group and never has been.

Final prediction: 2010 Bengals: 6-10. Check their schedule. Tell me where the wins are.