Bleacher Report - Articles by steve tripe

NFL: Why Football is More Physically Demanding Than Soccer

steve tripe — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 12:00:15 -0400

Yes, I know soccer fanatics are going crazy at this statement, but I challenge soccer nuts to plead their case because there's no soccer game that takes a heavier toll on the body than the NFL.

That is why if we had our NFL players like the fast, agile guys, we could dominate in Soccer.

Yes, I'm a huge NFL fan, and this can be seen as a complete biased opinion, but I'll state some cases.

First, after a game in the NFL, it takes at least a few days to recover. You can't play a game of football in the NFL and go out in two days and play another. You can in soccer.

Right there, I could just say "end of story." Soccer also doesn't require the mental aspect of football to learn playbooks, take notes and study in the classroom even harder than on the field.

Soccer is mostly endurance. NFL players need some endurance, a lot of weight lifting to have a hard physique to take the physical pounding that is said to be like getting in a car crash every hit.

I heard someone say they had grown up being fed the NFL their whole life and was actually more interested in soccer now. Well, maybe that's because its a lot easier on the body.

Soccer players don't constantly run, it's mostly the midfielders who do the most running; the other guys' times are just waiting for a play to develop. I'm not saying the guy is soft because he's now a soccer player, because I know it's just preference, but if you were to choose between the two and got equal pay, soccer would be a safer route.

Chances are you'll live a long life playing soccer instead of football. Also, you're less likely to have a career-ending injury that jeopardizes even your post-soccer life.

NFL players have to be in tip-top shape in order to take the pounding they get; otherwise they risk terrible injury. Also, I've seen 6-foot-3, 240-pound linebackers who can run as fast as any elite soccer player with speed.

Ray Lewis during his prime was eye-opening fast for his large physique. That's what college players say is the difference between college and the NFL: the speed.

Not only would NFL players with the speed and athleticism if they were just as good at soccer be able to dominate, but those foreign players would just bounce off the likes of Ray Lewis, Ed Reed and many more.

Hah, soccer players try to get physical with the NFL players? Come on, bring it on. They'll rock your world.

American Sports: Why the NFL Rules and Soccer Drools

steve tripe — Thu, 19 Jun 2008 19:53:28 -0400

I know there's getting to be a lot of talk around here about why soccer just doesn't resonate with Americans. I've left comments with others, but I want to try and clear up a few things for those still lingering.

Yes, it's hard to project what NFL players, among other athletes, could do if they put their efforts into soccer instead of another American sport of more popularity.

The reason I bring up the NFL and not other sports is because I think it's the identity that America is assuming. Baseball used to be our national pastime and basketball is ok, but the NFL is what it's all about. Don't believe me? Go look at the ratings.

It's the NFL, closely followed by college football. And the play in the NFL is the most comparable for players with soccer. You run around on a field and use athleticism to maneuver a big ball. One is primarily with hands and the other uses feet.

So what is it about the NFL that's so intriguing to Americans?

I believe the NFL is the most intriguing of the mind, and not as much the physical. They say football is 80 percent mental and 40 percent physical. Huh, lol. Yes, I know, the math is off...or is it.

For many, they consider the need to give more than 100 percent. But when you think about it, emphasis on think, the NFL has such a huge playbook, your study in the classroom is as important, if not more, than your play out on the field. It's strategy, and then there's a lot of scoring.

Watching a bunch of guys pass the ball around on the ground before actually making a move is not very fun to most. To the soccer purist, they say you just don't get it.

But there's not much to get. It's simple, and hardly any scoring occurs unless you get some lopsided matchups. It's like watching a pitchers duel.

Americans like offense, and soccer is just a different element. I can appreciate the skill of soccer as much as the next guy, but for anyone to say that we wouldn't fare much better if our best NFL players were in soccer is insane.

Think if Devin Hester was as good at soccer as he is at making moves past defenders from one end zone to the other. The speed, combined with the skill, would be amazing.

There are plenty of examples to show how America could dominate soccer if it was more appealing than football, but it's a moot point. I don't see us ever seeing that change, unless they change a couple of rules in soccer. But too many stubborn traditionalists can't see the light.

I, for one, might enjoy it more if they changed one rule, and that's offsides. Many times I see the forward break right when the ball gets passed, and they call offsides because he's got one foot ahead. It's absolutely ridiculous, and it stops the action and stops my interest.

It just kills the moment of excitement, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. So if you just get rid of it, we won't have to worry, plus it would increase the scoring a lot.

And that penalty kick has to be changed. I actually think that wherever the foul happens, that's where the kick should come from. No more of this inside the box, place it on a specified marker. They should set everyone where they were and give the free kick from the exact point of the foul.

These are a couple of other things that I think could make it more exciting and fun to watch.

But the NFL is our identity, and it's so cerebral. The strategy of the NFL puts soccer to shame. It's not even close, so don't try to argue. And that's another reason NFL rules in America.

Unlike a lot of sports, the NFL has a way of showing that you don't always need the best talent to win. A well-coached, planned-out scheme can win. There have been countless occasions where the inferior team won because of a well-coached game.

And in America, soccer just isn't going to get it done, monetarily, for the average kid growing up.

Let's face it, until they change a few things in soccer, it will never come close to the appeal of other American sports, much less the NFL, for the average American.

People say that we're getting better in soccer, but that just isn't true. Our best athletes aren't in soccer, and until they change the appeal of soccer, Americans will never take interest.

I think that even if they do change some of the things in soccer, and it becomes much more appealing, the NFL will always be No. 1.

Oakland Raiders: John Wade Will Be More Important Than Kwame Harris

steve tripe — Sat, 31 May 2008 15:22:50 -0400

There seems to be a lot of negative sentiment to getting Harris and why we didn't get a better tackle for the left side than him.

I'm here to tell you that if Wade connects well with JaMarcus, that could be a moot point.

Lets look at the Super Bowl when Sims was with the team. Wait, Sims was with the team that made it to Super Bowl. Now he's probably lost a step or two and that's why they got rid of him, but I believe Newberry was more the problem.

What happened after Barrett Robins went crazy and kept himself from playing the final battle? Maybe he wasn't the difference of the blowout, some tend to think so, but then in a domino effect of events could have been a major factor.

While watching some games, I noticed something that another Raider fan friend pointed out to me. He said look at Jeremy, he looks one way then another and snaps, and it looks like the Defense recognizes this and can anticipate the snap. Now if the Defense can get such a good jump often, that's a lot to ask for even the best Tackles to defend.

It doesn't matter what kind of tackle you are if the Defense is by you before you notice the snap. It seemed like Newberry didn't pick up on this. I saw a team in the backfield when the ball was snapped one time very noticeably and after I saw that flaw in Newberry. I think now the staff realizes that flaw, and others, and a reason why Newberry was released.

Wade is going to be a very important part of the O-line. If JaMarcus and he can get a good chemistry going, then the rest of the O-line will follow making it easier to block when the Defense is caught off guard and can't just rush in there off the snap. Harris is more athletic than Sims, plus the problems he had with the 49ers have already been pointed out by Cable and he knows what he needs to do and is eager to work on it.

You have to like a guy who's eager to work. But I believe Wade will be the main ingredient for the O-line. Chemistry is a major factor in success in Football. It's one sport that has a lot of players trying to get on the same page and there being so many variables that goes with the success or not.

Remember it's not necessarily the best players that work, but the right fit of players, and I believe that's what our staff is looking for. Harris might not be the best tackle, but maybe he will be the right tackle. And maybe Wade will be a better fit for the team too.

Remember the USA 1980 Olympic hockey team. The coach wasn't looking for the best players, he was looking for the right players, the right fit. The best players, ala the NHL All-Stars got killed by the Soviet national team, yet a group of college hockey players pulled off the greatest upset in history.

Of course, this isn't nearly the same magnitude because the talent among the NFL players isn't that skewed but you get the idea. By the way where does the Left Tackle of the Giants stand in relation to the other good team's left tackles.

Oakland Raiders: JaMarcus Russell has Nice Outlook

steve tripe — Thu, 29 May 2008 18:20:49 -0400

If you haven't seen Kirk on the NFL Network, and you're a Raiders fan, you'll like what you see. I'm sure some have heard the progress this season, but what lies ahead might be better than you think. It seems that along with a cannon-like arm, JaMarcus also has pinpoint accuracy.

Kirk says it's hard to tell because its only mini-camp workouts, but the fact that he feels sorry for the corners because they blanket their receivers, and JaMarcus puts it dead on every time, hasn't been said about a Raiders QB in a long time.

The other cool thing is his assessment of Javon Walker. Kirk reminded us of when they used to play against Javon, and he would catch everything. He also believes Javon has the necessary big-play ability. And like many have said, he likes McFadden because if the offense keeps them off of the field, then that bodes well for them.

I know we're still going to get the skeptics about whether or not JaMarcus will have the time to throw, but if Darren lives up to a little of the hype, and the progress of the O-line continues from last year, there will be great times ahead.

Morrison said that they're just concentrating on winning games, and all is well in Raider land. But the enthusiasm he has in working with, and seeing, JaMarcus out there is incredible. JaMarcus is in the best shape of his life. He's working hard and seeing results. I haven't heard these kind of positive comments about one of our QBs in a long while. From the sound of things, JaMarcus could be in the process of surprising even the most optimistic Raider fan.

Remember the last game against the Chargers? The team as a whole lost, but he did pretty well individually against a team that was supposed to be a Super-Bowl contender who needed that game for playoff seeding.

That Chargers were in a must-win situation, and they weren't laying down against a big rival. The final score and outcome was definitely not indicative of how close the game was really was.

Furthermore, JaMarcus, in limited time and limited play selection, did fairly well. Now he is in the best shape of his life, and he has a few games, and a full season of workouts, under his belt. He also has the study habits that Peyton did when he came out. Not to mention that he is working harder than any other Raider.

All of this and we haven't even begun to think of the possibilities for Darren McFadden. Oh yes, for the first time in a long time, Raider fans finally have a reason to be optimistic.

Oakland Raiders: Similarities Between Lane Kiffin and Jon Gruden

steve tripe — Mon, 26 May 2008 18:26:23 -0400

There are a lot of controversies to our drafting. Some say our run defense was the worst part of our game. Why didn't we take Dorsey? Some liked the high-flying Darren McFadden, probably the best talent of the draft.

I'm here to tell you things I believe could be on the horizon for success again, like the Raiders in the first part of the decade.

Between 2000 and 2002, the Oakland Raiders were winning, getting to the playoffs and made even a trip to the Super Bowl. So, what was the identity of the team in those years?

Gruden was all about the run, and we had a nice talent in Napoleon Kaufman. Oakland had a QB who was mobile and used a West Coast offense. Our defense consisted of two great corners and some good safety work. Now it is true we had two great WRs in Jerry Rice and Tim Brown, but the deep ball wasn't necessarily our focus. It was the run game.

Now let's fast forward to this year. What do we have now: two great corners, very good safeties, a mobile QB and now probably some of the best running back talent in the league. The only thing we need to find is those good WRs. but we have a lot of good prospects.

Kiffin is devoted to run first, that's why he acquired Tom Cable and Knapp. Its a run-first team to set up play action, and occasionally the deep ball.

The big myth about JaMarcus Russell is he's just got a great arm. Really? That's it? He's mobile, even more than Gannon, one of the best arms in the league, but he is good with the short game too. Now of course, he's had the best work ethic of any Raider this off-season rivaling Peyton's when he first came out.

When just quickly thinking what the Raiders makeup is this year, you would say the running game with Darren McFadden and two great corners with good safeties. I mean, we don't think about the great passing game.

When the Raiders faced the Ravens in the 2000 playoffs, the Raiders were No. 1 in rushing. The only trouble was the Ravens were No. 1 against the run. So the logical strategy is to pass against them, but Gruden was too conservative. It wasn't until the 2002 playoff run that the Raiders became the No. 1 passing attack with still a good running game.

So what is the same about this year versus the 2000 Raiders? I'll leave that up to you. It's pretty easy to see the similarities. But one thing I like in our favor, is that we have a QB who has far more potential than Gannon did. He can run left and throw back to the right, which the hardest throw to make. He is taller, bigger, more mobile with far better arm.

The cool thing about JaMarcus is he can flick the ball in there like others have to do winding up, and if he recognizes his capabilities can be ever so dangerous in the short game. But our game is run first, and now we have set a course to being great at that.

The passing will follow, and so will the success. The only concern is that this story doesn't end like the Gruden era, as I believe Kiffin can be better in one aspect, he's not so conservative.

So for all those opposed to Darren McFadden and not supposedly addressing the defensive line, as it was with those Gruden Raiders, let me say this. When you're scoring, the others have to keep up, and where does that lead, to our strength the pass D, just like it was with Gruden. So is the defensive line what you remember about those Gruden Raiders?

Oakland Raiders: O-Line Doubters have Forgotten Tom Cable

steve tripe — Thu, 22 May 2008 18:40:33 -0400

It seems as though we still have people who say our O-line needs help. Let me tell you, it's already here. Anyone who doesn't know Tom Cable, well, let's just take a brief look at his track record.

Without going into a lot of statistical archives, Tom Cable completely turns around O-lines everywhere he has gone. Go look at his career if you don't believe me. Bad O-lines have their sacks cut in half the very next year, and last year was no different.

Under Art Shell, we had 72 sacks and one of worst running attacks, and this even when Art himself was all about the run. What a joke, he couldn't even live up to his own standard. But in comes Kiffin, who is going to be a great coach IMO, and totally revitalizes the offense by acquiring Tom Cable.

Instantly, with great intent, Raider fans look on to see how the O-line will look. In the first few games of the year, Cable made us forget there was ever a problem with giving up sacks, as we start 2-2 and could have just as easily been 4-0. Later in the season we go on a three-game stretch with only one sack given up, and this was against a tougher part of our schedule. That's good even for the Patriots and Chargers. This also shows how much progress we made, even throughout the season.

Now if we had only had some playmakers...wait, we do. Oh yeah, and by the way, we also went from one of the worst rushing teams to sixth in league, despite changing RBs throughout season, and we lead the league for a bit.

Tom Cable has had his teams leading the league in rushing wherever he has gone, and now with McFadden and Bush, this year will be no different. Not to mention he has built chemistry, and added two better solutions to the O-line.

For anyone doubting Harris, his attributes are better than Sims, but his problem was the same as Gallery, too many coaching schemes confuse the heck out of him. Cable has already pointed out the problems, making Harris anxious to get to work and correct them. Plus he'll be able to focus on one thing, and not 50.

Something else I want to mention. One unsung issue that I don't think most people recognized was letting Newberry go for Wade. One major problem last year was that Newberry would give away the cadence to opposing defenses by doing the same movement before the hike. Even I could recognize it, and I'm not studying film on the Raiders' offense. The center is an important position in the flow, and could help tremendously in correcting false starts, while keeping opposing defenses off-guard. He can even help reduce the amount of sacks.

Tom Cable is going to make people forget that there ever was a problem, and we'll be enjoying the success of JaMarcus, McFadden, and Bush, not struggling with the old mishaps of the O-line.

Will people please stay away from badmouthing the O-line; it really makes you look foolish and ignorant. Even my wife, who is new to football, and a Chargers fan, darnit, knows that the Raiders don't have an O-line problem anymore. And boy, if you show yourself less knowledgeable than my wife, well, there goes your manhood and your fanhood.

Does Last Year Prove New England Patriots' Innocence?

steve tripe — Wed, 21 May 2008 13:12:10 -0400

I'm sure a lot of Patriots’ fans and others think that they still proved their greatness with their record last year and say that despite being under scrutiny after first game and video taping, found out that it didn't matter.

That it didn't help them, so to speak.

Well, I’m here to put a good wrench in that theory.

First of all, if something doesn't help you, then why even do it. But I’ll go as far to say yes, the video taping didn't matter last year.

They already built a cohesive unit over the years with lots of developed confidence, with Brady and the Oline having more chemistry than blood relatives and a good Defense already.

Am I saying they would've been like the Falcons of last year in years previous without the taping? No. But let’s look at the first year.

Tom Brady, an unknown, and a team with some talent but not the likes of a Super Bowl champion.

Who gains tremendous confidence after their run and getting the Super Bowl title? Now let’s fast forward to last year. Now they have the same basic unit from that Super Bowl in 2001.

The year before last they went to playoffs had a good record and beat Chargers with nine pro bowlers to their two. But their wide receivers were lacking and negating them another trip to the Super Bowl.

So, last year they built up that wide receiver core, and that they did. Adding Randy Moss, the most prolific threat of a receiver in the NFL, completely opening up the rest of the passing attack.

Teams just could not flat out play them straight up. And unlike previous years now, Brady could just lob passes up for Moss, and he would get the job done. It was video gamish easy.

They already did well the previous year. adding Moss made any video taping irrelevant because when you have a guy who commands that kind of attention and an Oline that lets Brady take a nap for awhile, there was no remedy.

Until people finally figured out about rushing Brady like there's no tomorrow. Giants had the key ingredient to beating Brady and the Patriots, the pass rush. We saw a few times that Patriots had almost been beat with it.

But the Giants’ defensive ends were so good during the playoffs, they could just rush four and be able to cover, whereas other teams couldn't.

Plus, like the Patriots, the Giants had their tall athletic version of Moss in Plaxico Burress. But the Giants had a better running game, which didn't make them one dimensional.

It’s amazing to me the excuses that people come up with trying to make Patriots out to be innocent, as if all this SpyGate stuff is meaningless.

Usually where there's smoke, there's fire. If other teams did it, then let’s tag them and clean this up. After all, don't fans want to know what their getting is legit.

And remember, right before the season all the coaches were told in a meeting specifically not to do it. Yet Belichek believes he’s above that and conveniently misinterprets the message.

After all if something doesn't help you, then why even do it? Why even play with jeopardizing your team for something that is so useless? Does anyone really think that Belichek didn’t know every little thing that happens around his team?

Hasn't he acted so secretive all these years so that he could keep his team productivity at bay, yet he’s oblivious to his teams game planning and strategy?

Come on people. Don't keep your head in the sand.

Things I Have Not Heard Them Say About Spygate

steve tripe — Tue, 20 May 2008 18:02:15 -0400

Alrighty then. I hope you are reading this with an understanding that I believe Patriots are not only guilty, but as bad as a little kid getting caught red-handed in the cookie jar.

Yes I am a Raider fan, and no, the Spygate thing isn't the reason the Raiders got the shaft in the snow job game. We hear that everybody cheats. Really, everyone? Does everyone rob banks, murder, or steal cars?

You cant clump everyone in the same category. Belicheck is a pompous man who thinks he's above the NFL's laws.

But my main reason I thought something was up at first wind of Spygate was the Patriots-Eagles Super Bowl. The Eagles had nine pro bowlers to the Patriots two. The Eagles were destroying the Patriots in the first half and Patriots had no answers offensively.

Then suddenly, after half time, enough time to show plenty of video, they had every answer for the Eagles defense. Hmm, coincidence? I think not. The Patriots have been considered a dynasty for all this time with far lesser talent than the opponents who have good coaches and staff themselves. And after that Eagles game, i said that does it Charlie Weis is a genius. So how is Mr. Weis doing now. why does he shut off the people trying to contact him about all this stuff if there's nothing to hide. Why are any tapes at all destroyed if there's nothing to hide.

No, my friends—you don't even need to able to read between the lines on this one. And I know the Raiders have not done it. How could they possibly be losing like they have if so? There's so much more, but this is just a no brainer.

And for anyone who says, well, what about them going 18-1? I'll clearly tell them: It's about chemistry and continuity, which the Patriots have built up over all these years. Add one great WR, Randy Moss, and it puts them over the top.

Without Moss they would've at least lost two or more games. He completely opened up everything for them after having everything in place already, not to mention Welker—a big surprise. I'm sure that Belicheck and his coaching staff are good, but we know in any sport chemistry with the core ingredients of the team built up you can be good even without Spygate stuff.

There have been great teams in past before the technology, but usually those great teams have some great star players—more than Patriots have had all these years.

And the penalty wasn't even a slap on the wrist to Belichick. Money is nothing to these guys and it wasn't even their highest draft pick.

Come on, if found truly guilty like O know he is, he should be kicked out of the league. If you can't win the old fashioned way, by eyeballing and determining game plans, then you don't deserve anything, and I would take all those Super Bowls away.

The sad thing is all the teams that got jipped out of a shot at the Super Bowl.