Bleacher Report - Articles by Scott Goll

Broncos Defeat Cowboys, Adding Legitimacy to 2009 Campaign

Scott Goll — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 09:34:15 -0400

Detractors of the Denver Broncos' early-season success have a little less to chew on today, after Sunday's 17-10 victory over the visiting Dallas Cowboys.

A team given a little bit of credit, and a healthy dose of "yeah, but" from its critics over a 3-0 start, the Broncos needed to show they were capable of winning against one of the NFL's upper-echelon teams.

Wins over Cincinnati, Cleveland, and Oakland, with resounding defense leading the way, had done little to sway many experts into thinking that Denver's success could carry over into the toughest part of its schedule. With those teams possessing suspect offenses, some doubt could be rightfully cast. Until now.

Denver took on the league's top-rated rushing attack, and limited it to just 74 yards (the Cowboys came in averaging over 190 yards per game on the ground). The Broncos added, for good measure, five sacks, an interception, and a recovered fumble, while pressuring Tony Romo often. The result: Dallas was 3-for-14 on third down.

The Broncos were particularly stingy in the second half in terms of total yardage allowed, while shutting out the Cowboys over the final 45 minutes. They needed every bit of that airtight defense to pull out the victory.

Denver trailed most of the game, as the Cowboys' first-quarter dominance had stood up with a 10-7 lead late into the fourth quarter.

With just under six minutes remaining, the Broncos got a 28-yard field goal from Matt Prater, and then took the lead on a highlight-reel catch-and-run touchdown, Kyle Orton to Brandon Marshall.

The 51-yard score with 1:46 remaining began with Marshall picking the ball from just over the top of a Cowboys defender's head, racing towards the middle of the field, then cutting back to the right again, faking out and eluding several Dallas players in the process of scoring the go-ahead touchdown.

The Broncos still had to hold their breaths until the final seconds, before securing the victory.

Dallas, facing a fourth-down with about a minute to play, connected on an improbable 53-yard gain, moving to the Denver 20.

The Cowboys moved as close as the two-yard line with nine seconds to play, but on the ensuing two plays, Champ Bailey swatted away the potential game-tying touchdowns, securing the dramatic victory.

The 4-0 Broncos won over many critics who deemed their early-season success a complete mirage. While it will still take time for the sports world to be won over, continued success by Denver is looking more like a legitimate byproduct of an amazing turnaround by the defense, and something sustainable.

Meanwhile, the Denver offense manages to get by with solid rushing, a very good offensive line, and game-managing by Orton which thus far has been largely mistake-free. While Jay Cutler won many games with extraordinary plays for Denver, he helped contribute to losses with extraordinary risk-taking.

His Favre-ian abilities make for exciting football, but did not necessarily translate to a winning product for the Broncos.

Time will tell how it all works out for Denver, but so far, Orton at QB has not meant bad things for the Broncos.

Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl. Surely Orton could, too, with the right players around him. So far, quarter of the way through the season, those players have looked to be the right combination, for sure.

Denver Broncos Face Tough Schedule in Quest for Playoff Return

Scott Goll — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 12:16:21 -0400

Let's take a look back: It's the end of the 2008 season. Mike Shanahan fired. Jay Cutler traded for Kyle Orton and picks. A defense in shambles, having allowed 28 points per game.

Brandon Marshall wanting to be traded and suspended during a portion of the pre-season. 2009 looking like a major rebuilding effort for rookie coach Josh McDaniels.

Fast forward to the end of September. Broncos are 3-0. Orton is playing mistake-free football. Offensive line protecting Orton and creating gaps for the running game as well as ever.

Defense has allowed a total of 16 points over three games, stuffing the run and pressuring the quarterback.

Excuse me?

Any Denver fan couldn't be happier after a 3-0 start and an early division lead in the AFC West.

As McDaniels and crew will readily admit, there is still much work to do. The schedule does not lie.

The Broncos will face a decidedly stiffer slate of competition in the coming weeks, with stouter offenses and defenses to contend with.

Can Denver's offense, minus a prolific passing game, be balanced enough to hang with the big boys? Can its defense, against better offenses than the anemic Browns and Raiders, continue to impose its will?

Prior to its Week 7 bye, Denver faces Dallas and New England at home, before visiting San Diego for a Monday Night contest. All playoff-quality teams with potentially explosive offenses.

Coming out of the bye, the Broncos pay a visit to the suddenly dynamic Baltimore Ravens, followed by a home date with Pittsburgh.

For Denver to entertain playoff hopes, it must come out of that stretch with at least two wins, probably three. That would leave the Broncos at 5-3 or 6-2.

With two games remaining with Kansas City, and a home date with Oakland, eight or nine wins would be nearly a certainty assuming no letdowns.

They'd then need a couple of wins in the other second-half games (at Washington, Indy and Philly, home for San Diego and the Giants).

No guarantees, since this team has not been severely tested, and has not shown a penchant for second-half surges in recent years.

Nevertheless, an optimistic outlook heading into October is certainly not what many experts saw coming out of the Mile High City, after a dismal 2008 season and winter of gloom and doom prognostications.

Broncos Stand 2-0 after Defense-Led Home-Opening Win over Browns

Scott Goll — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 09:03:08 -0400

After a 2008 season that started as an inferno, and ended colder than an Antarctic winter, Broncos fans have learned that guarded optimism is a way of life in the post-Mike Shanahan/Jay Cutler era.

Yet after a fairly impressive 27-6 win over Cleveland, there are some reasons to believe the 2009 Broncos may not be the debacle many expected this team to be.

The offense was pretty efficient, amassing almost 450 total yards. Kyle Orton wasn't good (no surprise: 19-of-37), but was not intercepted and was involved enough to even out a good ground attack.

Knowshon Moreno carried 17 times for 75 yards, and Correll Buckhalter added 76 yards including a 45-yard TD scamper midway through the fourth quarter to seal the game.

Jabar Gaffney and Brandon Stokley turned out to the be the big receiving targets, while last year's No. 1 and No. 2 receivers, Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal, combined for just six catches and 54 yards.

The offensive efficiency, and the defense's outstanding effort, helped cover up the fact that kicker Matt Prater again was abominable, missing a pair of field goals from inside 40 yards while the game was still close.

The real story of the day was Denver's defense. Yes. You read that correctly. The revamped squad, under the 3-4 scheme, seems to have turned the corner.

Of course, after last season, anything outside of falling off a cliff with lead boots, would have been an improvement, but there are signs that the Denver defense could be at the very least, respectable, if not more.

With Andra Davis (10 tackles vs. Cleveland) and converted lineman Elvis Dumervil (4 sacks, all in the 2nd half) providing a formidable linebacker tandem, along with Brian Dawkins and Champ Bailey holding watch over the opposing passing game, there could be a quality defense in the making.

The jury is still out though, on what this squad can do against a high-quality offensive team. Neither the Bengals nor Browns are reminiscent of a 400-point offense, to put it mildly. Last year, however, even 200-point offenses found ways to put up points with regularity against the Broncos, so some optimism is warranted.

With a trip to Oakland coming this weekend, the possibility of a 3-0 start for Denver is not unreasonable. The schedule gets much, much harder thereafter (consecutive games against: Dallas, New England, San Diego, Baltimore, & Pittsburgh).

The Broncos will need that 3-0 start, and at least 2-3 wins in that following five-game span, to prove to naysayers that this is a different kind of Denver team than the 2008 disaster was.

Jim Rice Heads to Hall of Fame: Voters Finally Got It Right

Scott Goll — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 21:16:32 -0500

You'll be hard-pressed to find a Yankee fan willing to say positive things about the Red Sox. Any Red Sox. Present or past. That's just the way it is.

And yet, Jim Rice being voted into the Hall of Fame today has finally corrected a long-standing injustice. There, I said it.

In an era of baseball with inflated offense and poor pitching, we've become too accustomed to the idea that any player with fewer than 500 homers, RBI totals not exceeding 140 per season, a lifetime average below .320, or fewer than 3,000 hits simply isn't a Hall of Famer.

To those not old enough to remember what a great player Jim Rice was, or what statistical achievements from his era of baseball meant, it's too bad his entry into the Hall is being nay-sayed.

The fact of the matter is that Rice was one of the most feared, most consistent hitters of his time. His career numbers (382 HR, 2452 hits, 1451 RBI, lifetime .298 hitter) would be considered nice if he were part of the current regime of offensive players, but in the pitching-rich 1970s and 80s, his numbers were superb.

Rice's reputation as a player was not one of being particularly media friendly, which may have harmed his chances of entry as the years passed. More recent candidates rose to the forefront with lofty 90s and 2000-era offensive outputs on their resumes.

I applaud those who recognized Rice's contributions and his place in the game. Whether you loved him or hated him, he was one of the best there was, and for that his place in history is now finally secured as it should be—with enshrinement in Cooperstown.

Marian Gaborik: Possible Surgery May Spell the End in Minnesota

Scott Goll — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 06:48:13 -0500

They say in life, two things are inevitable: death and taxes.

In hockey, those two inevitabilities were that injuries will befall both Peter Forsberg and Saku Koivu.

Well, the face of the Minnesota Wild has made his case to entrench himself as a long-standing member in the newly formed Triumvirate of Triage.

Marian Gaborik, will undergo surgery for his problematic left hip on Monday, and miss a minimum of 10 weeks according to the team. His season, and perhaps his Wild career, might both be finished.

The talented but oft-injured winger has played just six games this season and missed roughly 100 during the course of the last four campaigns. After missing training camp with a separate injury, the 26-year-old soon-to-be a free agent may have skated his last shift with the franchise.

One hopes, as a fan of the game, that a player as talented as Gaborik can finally overcome his injuries on a long-term basis. Last season he played 77 games and was good for a career-high 42 goals and 83 points.

But being on the ice has been more of the exception than the rule for Gaborik, who reportedly turned down several offers from Minnesota to extend his current contract.

My instinct tells me he'll have the surgery and miraculously return to form for Pittsburgh or Detroit at a reasonable price. Whether he stays on the ice or not is anybody's guess.

Vikings-Eagles TV Blackout: If It Happens, Who Benefits?

Scott Goll — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 08:28:41 -0500

The Vikings still must sell over 3,000 tickets by Saturday at 4:30pm Eastern for their Sunday playoff game versus the Eagles.

A television blackout looms, unless Minnesota can fill those seats. Earlier in the week, they needed to sell 8,000 vacant seats by 4:30 pm Eastern Friday, an NFL-imposed deadline which was extended. While progress has been made, it remains unclear whether the Vikings can sell the necessary ducats.

Take a good look at Adrian Peterson above. It may be the last time you see him until the preseason if the game is not carried to those unable to watch it on TV.

The blackout would affect not only the local market, but also satellite, cable and other systems.

While being unable to sell out a playoff game would be an embarrassment to the Vikings, I honestly don't see the logic behind a television blackout, if the league wants to market its sport especially at the most critical time of year.

It's understandable to want fannies in the seats and not have everyone at home watching it on TV. But 3,000 seats? The Vikings' facility will be far from empty.

Why punish all Minnesota and fans of the NFL far and wide?

What's next? If ABC doesn't sell out tickets to Dancing with the Stars, it's blacked out?

The blackout policy is shortsighted and only harms the fans. Knock it off already.

Pro Athletes and Domestic Violence

Scott Goll — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 05:24:55 -0500

The recent allegations and videotape that appears to show Brian Giles physically harming his former girlfriend is yet another in an exceedingly long line of publicized incidents involving pro athletes and their significant others.

I have a hard enough time comprehending how one human being can treat another in that way, in general. Male versus male, while not condonable, is at least, in theory, an even match. It shouldn't happen, but at least you're picking on "someone your own size" so to speak.

Any man, smacking around any woman, I cannot fathom, justify, or even think of without getting sick.

Yet, it's almost an afterthought when we read about it buried in the sports pages. It doesn't live long in our psyche, especially if he goes on to hit a game-winning homer the next day—all is forgiven somehow.

Are these pro athletes just a cross-section of society that just happens to get noticed more than your average wife-beating miscreant in Nowhere, America?

Or is there a larger subsection among the athlete population?

I know of no formal studies, but I do have a theory.

Sports, by nature, especially the professional kind, are occupations heavily based on aggression. Whatever the particular sport is, it is one where you must be driven, focused, ready to pounce on what you want and stop at nothing to get it, or prevent your opponent from thwarting you.

Kill or be killed. Hit them before they hit you. Or something to that effect.

Pro athletes, I theorize, are used to getting what they want. They get the attention. They get the money. To some extent, I believe there's a sense of entitlement.

So what happens when athletes who are more predisposed to the me-first attitude are in what's supposed to be a relationship of equals? If there's a difference of opinion, some of them impose their will. If their will is not accepted by their partner, then perhaps the frustration mounts to a point where it becomes physical.

Now, I've never been a pro athlete, and I've never struck a woman, so for me to say where the anger and abuse stems from, is only one man's thoughts and judgments from afar.

What I do know, is that professional sports needs to do a better job of stamping this putrid behavior out and making sure the world knows that it's unacceptable and won't be tolerated, whether you're a star, role player, or ticket-scanner.

I used to like Brian Giles the baseball player. While the allegations are just that, the likelihood is that they are true. They usually are.

I will continue to judge each player, each incident, on its own merits, but we know all too well most of the violence reported is not fabricated to extort money from the athlete. Naturally, Giles is contending it IS about the money.

Maybe Giles is not the only person to blame in this relationship...maybe he is.

My goal is not to specifically vilify him but to make a point.

If these violent athletes respect only their power, their money, their control over everything, then only one thing can be done to mitigate it: Take it all away.

You beat your wife and harm your marriage, your relationship, your public perception, and your team's image: You lose your job.

Not only that, you're banned from the sport for a period of time. When you return, it's mandated you receive less salary, etc.

Radical? Perhaps.

What would happen though, if you or I did something evil in public (or in private) and your boss caught wind of it and saw it in the papers or on TV? Think corporate America is going to pat you on the back?

No, more than likely you're out on the street, especially in this economy, faster than you can say "So long, sucker." Not only that, you're likely going to jail. The pro athletes and their money, can often buy their way into probation or a short sentence, just by getting a high-priced lawyer.

The double-standard for pro athletes and the law has lived on far too long.

Michael Vick's doing hard time for harming dogs (and I like dogs, don't agree with dog fighting for one second, don't get me wrong), yet most of these domestic abusers get off with a slap on the wrist. Vick's being punished because commerce was involved—the government didn't get their cut.

There's no money in wife-beating, so I guess that's alright somehow, no prosecution necessary.

Now I feel like beating something—that sound you hear is my head against the wall.

Terrell Davis: Hall of Famer?

Scott Goll — Wed, 31 Dec 2008 02:06:31 -0500

Terrell Davis' last game in the NFL was in 2001, after which he walked away from a game he dominated. It was a brilliant but abbreviated career cut short by injury. The question bears asking once again: Is T.D. a Hall of Famer?

The Broncos' all-time leading rusher is one of 25 semifinalists up for induction next year, with the ballot to be whittled down to 15 early in January. Inductees will be chosen on Jan. 31, with four to seven new members permissible under the rules.

There's a lot of beef to this list of semifinalists. In my estimation, the most likely players to make it are:

Bruce Smith
Shannon Sharpe
Cris Carter
Andre Reed
Rod Woodson

There could be others, but these are five high-profile, deserving candidates.

Why should Davis be on this list? Simply put, he was the most dominating running back of his era. Of the current modern era Hall of Fame running backs, only the great Eric Dickerson and Earl Campbell had more rushing yards in their first four seasons.

Davis amassed a staggering 6,413 yards, 56 touchdowns, and a 4.8 yards-per-carry average in that span. He ran for 1,117 yards in just 14 games as a rookie sixth round pick, and fared better each of the next three years.

After bettering 1,500 yards in 1996, he raised the bar again by leading the Broncos to their first Super Bowl victory in 1997. Davis was the Super Bowl MVP, rushing for 157 yards and three touchdowns. This, on the heels of a superb 1,750-yard season with 15 scores.

Not only was Davis a premier rusher, he was also a skilled receiver out of the backfield. He had 127 catches over those first three seasons for nearly 1,000 yards total.

His receiving numbers went down markedly in 1998 though. That's because he was busy becoming only the third running back in NFL history at the time to eclipse the 2,000 yard mark.

Davis' 2,008 yards gave him his third consecutive AFC rushing title, the NFL title, and the AP's Offensive Player of the Year award. He scored a staggering 21 touchdowns. For good measure, he ran for 102 yards and gained 51 yards in pass receptions as the Broncos secured back-to-back Super Bowl wins.

Unfortunately for Davis and for Denver, injuries befell him repeatedly, limiting him to just nine games over the next two seasons. In 1999 he tore his ACL and MCL versus the Jets. In 2000, another injury set him back most of the year.

2001, his final season in the NFL, was another injury-marred campaign, though Davis showed the skill had not faded. In just eight games, he ran for 701 yards with 4.2 yards-per-carry.

In the end, he needed arthroscopic surgery on both knees, and was never able to make a comeback. There was talk of Davis having microfracture surgery and an eventual return to the NFL, but it never materialized.

Making the Hall of Fame should signify a career in which the player was dominant and the best of his era. It is clear that Davis was one of these rare players.

More ammunition for the Davis argument can be found here.

Davis put together seven seasons with 7,600+ yards, and that includes two seasons in which he combined for less than 500 due to injury. His career 4.6 yards-per-carry is among the best rankings in NFL history.

While I certainly understand the arguments that Davis would be more easily inducted with a longer body of work, such as 10,000 yards, etc., it is unquestionable that he would have reached every requirement possible. Without injury, Davis would likely have reached 10,000 yards before the age of 30.

Nevertheless, we're looking at a two-time champion, a Super Bowl MVP, a man who led his league in rushing, who set records and matched records held by the immortals of the game. T.D. was no fluke.

It is not unprecedented in sports to enshrine those who walked away from the game early or who did not play for 15 years. Campbell and Jim Brown each dominated the sport and played less than 10 years.

Sandy Koufax's 10-year career, with just 165 wins, did not prevent him from making baseball's Hall of Fame—his sport recognized his dominance.

Valid arguments can be made against Davis getting the call, and perhaps this is not his year, given the caliber of players eligible.

Let's not forget about T.D. though, folks. There were few who were ever better than him.

The numbers don't lie, and neither does the video.

The End of an Era in Denver: Broncos Part Ways with Mike Shanahan

Scott Goll — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 21:46:11 -0500

In a move that surprised many, the Broncos fired their coach of 14 seasons Mike Shanahan, yesterday.

Shanahan is the last link to the Broncos' glory years, which included their back-to-back Super Bowl titles during the 1997 and 1998 seasons. Tom Nalen, still technically with the team, is injured and did not play.

Ironically, the Denver icon was dismissed under the same scenario under which he was hired, with the Broncos having gone the previous three seasons with a combined .500 record and no playoff victories.

The 1980-83 teams were the last Broncos squad to go four straight seasons without a playoff berth, and apparently owner Pat Bowlen is determined to not let that be matched in 2009.

Shanahan leaves a legacy of transforming Denver from good-but-not-great franchise that had been bullied around in Super Bowls galore, to one respected around the league. Before the Patriots recent dynasty, it was the Broncos who held the mantle as best team in the NFL over a three-year period, going 39-9 with two titles from 1996-98.

The steely-eyed Shanahan, known for his intensity, was never able to get as much out of his team after that, though. His post-Elway teams made the playoffs only four times in the subsequent 10 seasons, losing first-round matchups three times in blowouts.

Detractors credit his success to having Elway, and his deficiencies exposed once subpar quarterbacks became the soup du jour in the Mile High city. Brian Griese and Jake Plummer, to name a couple, never lived up to their billing or even remotely reminded Denver fans of No. 7.

One thing Shanahan's teams were always able to do, was run the ball. Bolstered by a top-notch offensive line, a series of backs gave the Broncos one of the best running attacks perennially: Terrell Davis, Olandis Gary, Mike Anderson, and Tatum Bell among them.

In the end, Shanahan's gifted offenses, even with deficiencies at QB, could not compensate for poor defensive teams.

In the late '80s and early '90s, the Denver teams were epitomized by a stingy defense, and an offense that was "John Elway and the 10 Dwarves." Somehow, the teams of the past few years, were nearly the opposite in makeup. No longer a defensive power, it's a source of mockery and the Broncos are now known solely for their offense.

In the end, whatever the chemistry was, whatever the forte' of the team was, it was the overall lack of success, and coming up short in recent big games, that eventually led to Shanahan's demise.

Two years ago, needing only a home win against a poor San Francisco team, the Broncos squandered a 10-point halftime lead and lost in overtime. After Sunday's season-ending blowout in San Diego ended Denver's playoff hopes and capped an historical three-game slide, it became clear to Bowlen that the time had come to part ways with the popular Shanahan.

While it is still a bit of a shock to me that he is gone, if there was a time to make a move, now is the time. With Denver teetering on the tightrope of mediocrity, ownership needs to make a commitment to do whatever it takes to build a defense that can take the pressure-cooker off Jay Cutler's shoulders.

Still maturing, Cutler performed admirably, but had way too much responsibility in being forced to constantly score in order to stay ahead or keep pace. Often mistakes were made, because he thought he had to do it all. Many times he DID do it all. But one young-but-talented QB can't carry a team with this many holes long-term.

I am sad about it being the end of an era. I smiled finding the above Shanahan-Elway picture in the old uni's. There were some very proud years. Those years are gone, and while they live on in memory, clearly new memories need to be created. The recent ones leave a bad taste in most Broncos fans palettes.

So, who's next? Time will tell. I am hoping Bill Cowher's rejection of the Jets' offer to meet means less about not being interested in coaching next year, and more about wanting to be in an exciting city that's all about football. He would bring the fire, and smash-mouth attitude, this team needs. There WOULD be defense, a really good one, in time.

Should be very interesting to see how this all develops.

In the meantime, thanks Mike, for all the memories, and for delivering the Broncos out of Simpsons' jokery. Despite any recent embarrassments, there's two Super Bowl titles in the books that can never be taken away, and they will resonate in all Denver fans' minds for a long, long time. We will always be thankful for your contributions.

Time to Minimize the Importance of the NHL Shootout

Scott Goll — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 05:07:44 -0500

I'll put it out front that I'm old school.

Never liked the shootout, never will.

I do understand, however, that it's likely here to stay.

There's an unattractive aspect to the tie and a lack of finality that paying fans deserve to resolve.

I still believe overtime, and playing the game of hockey to resolve a deadlock, is the best way to finish a contest. Play until someone wins.

Since scoring can be tough to do, I can understand why the NHL wanted some sort of way to minimize the length of a game, add excitement, and ensure a winner.

Unfortunately, the shootout is hockey's equivalent of the Home Run Derby, a three-point shooting contest, or "Punt, Pass, and Kick."

In short, the shootout reflects a one-on-one battle. Hockey is rarely a one-on-one battle, except during a rare penalty shot.

To award two points for a regulation or overtime win, but award the same two points for winning a shootout contest, should not occur in my opinion.

The NHL should place more emphasis on winning the game during its "hockey stage," as opposed to its "skills competition" stage—otherwise known as the shootout.

Too many points are being handed out. If you can't win in regulation or overtime, you don't deserve two points just for having a couple of skaters with fancy moves.

My system would give teams one point guaranteed for tying through regulation. If you win overtime you get two points. If you go to the shootout and win, you get 1.5.

Now, I know the half-point scenario is not clean, nor is it sexy. But it sends a message that it's not simply enough to make it to OT and then cling to dear life until the shootout.

If your team is in the playoff hunt, or needs help in the standings, let's see you open it up, win it in OT, and earn the full two points.

You'll see more exciting overtimes—and hopefully fewer shootouts.

Winning a hockey game and winning some cutesy competition that only rewards the nifty skaters and stick-handlers are two different things.

I'd rather see someone knock home a rebound in overtime, while battling two defensemen, than see one more orchestrated breakaway. Ever.

Claude Lemieux Returning to New Jersey?

Scott Goll — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 02:39:02 -0500

Now that I have your attention—no, this headline is not entirely what it appears to be.

In case you haven't heard the news, the San Jose Sharks signed the 43-year-old, who is looking to add a ring to his thumb, to go along with the previous four he's won.

While the Devils went back to their roots during the offseason, signing Bobby Holik and Brian Rolston, it would have been only fitting to seek the services of the aging, but beloved agitator. But it was not to be.

Still, there is a chance that he may get a chance to skate in front of the New Jersey faithful one last time. The Sharks are scheduled to visit the Prudential Center on Sunday, February 15.

I think it would be a great story. If Chris Chelios was able to do what he did at a ripe old age, who's to say Claude, even after five years out of the NHL, can't serve as a veteran influence on the third or fourth line of the league's top team, and give them much-needed leadership heading into the playoffs?

San Jose is a fairly young team, and this is a good signing for them. Currently toiling with the Worcester Sharks of the American Hockey League, Lemieux has six points in 14 games, with a plus-three rating and a health 12 PIM.

Do I think the Devils should have signed him? No. I think the franchise is in a different place, and more veteran, than the Sharks are. They have their battle-tested vets—Brodeur, White, Madden, Pandolfo, Elias, etc.

Still, I will look on curiously, to see if he-of-the-wicked-grin, has one more ace (or stick jab) up his sleeve.

Just when you thought it was safe to go back in the water...

Bowling Deserves More Attention in Sporting World

Scott Goll — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 06:29:47 -0500

As an avid bowler, I've always wondered why the popularity of the sport has waned from its heyday in the 50's, 60's, 70's and 80's. Bowling is an activity enjoyed recreationally and competitively, by young and old, without any restrictions on weather.

It doesn't matter if you're short or tall, slim or portly. While bowling equipment can become pricey to the serious player, at its base, it's not a financially-straining game and one that everyone in the family can enjoy together.

Perhaps it's that very concept that fools the unwitting non-bowler into thinking it is not a true competitors' game, that there is limited athletic ability required, or that it's simply not "cool" anymore.

The PBA (Professional Bowlers Tour) has done a better job in recent years of publicizing itself and its players, but many years of neglect, and loss of its national telecasts on ABC (which used to be a staple) hurt the sport greatly.

In a "look at me" sporting environment, what was more of a gentleman's game became too vanilla for many. A closer look at today's professional ranks shows more animation and flair, without the poor sportsmanship in other sports.

What I love about bowling is that there is literally nobody to blame for a loss but yourself, and nobody to take credit but yourself, for a win. You can't blame your defense. No fluke goals. No botch by the replay official. No bogus foul call. No home field advantage.

It's you against your opponent. You each have one ball. Ten pins. 60 feet.

It would take quite a long time to explain all intricacies of how the top level of bowling is much different and much more difficult than what the regular bowlers like myself bowl on each week.

To oversimplify, every lane has oil on it, which, though unseen, has a dramatic effect on how the ball rolls and curves ("hooks") into the middle of the pins. The pros have much more difficult patterns to contend with. Accuracy, speed, consistency, and the ability to "see' how the oil has moved from shot to shot by reading the reaction of the ball, makes their profession a very physically demanding, but also mentally demanding game.

In short, me bowling a 220 on Wednesday night is not nearly the same as the 220 you see a pro shoot on TV. And therein lies the challenge of convincing the uninitiated that "No, you really CAN'T do what they do."

I tried it once. Bowled a regional tour event (think of it as tour qualifying). I thought I knew what I was up against. Boy, I did not have a clue. I average a shade over 200 in my Joe-Schmoe league. I was fortunate to shoot 170 with the big boys.

Nevertheless, I highly recommend that anyone seeking to challenge themselves, give the sport of bowling a look. It is difficult, challenging, and downright addictive too.

Bowling combines mental toughness, physical strength, flexibility, consistency, intelligence, with just a touch of controlled destruction (those of you who know the feeling of pins blasting back with that perfect strike know how good that feels).

And if you're just lucky enough to be in a zone one night and throw 12 strikes in a row for that perfect 300 game, it's something you'll never forget. I wear my ring proudly.

Give it an honest try. Buy yourself a ball. Take a lesson. Go watch a league one night, and the fun there is to be had. Bet ya a dollar you have a blast and can't wait to go again.

Good luck and good rolling!

Flawed NFL playoff system Needs Revision

Scott Goll — Mon, 29 Dec 2008 05:07:05 -0500

Writer's note: I'll preface the article by noting that this in no way is an anti-Chargers rhetoric. Had Denver won Sunday night they still would not have belonged in the playoffs within a just system.

The current four-division conference alignment in the NFL further convolutes and waters down the legitimacy of the playoff system, clouding the waters on which are truly the top teams.

While scenarios such as the Colts visiting San Diego, and Atlanta visiting Arizona, are not every-year occurrences, the fact that they are allowed to happen at all, shows inherent weakness in the playoff seeding and berthing system.

As it stands, four division winners must make the playoffs, regardless of strength of division. It's reasonable to assume that with some frequency, there will be a "weak sister" in at least one division. Last year's NFC South saw Tampa go 9-7 and win the division.

Winning a division having to beat out only three of your rivals, versus the old system when you usually had to beat out four, lessens the achievement. The last two years, five of the eight divisions have had at least one five-win-or-less team within it.

The more games you play within your division, the more meaningful that title is. In the current system you have six divisional games, meaning most are out of division. It used to be half your games.

So what does the division title mean?

Further, winning your division guarantees a home-field match-up. Is this fair? The Falcons, a 4-4 road team, now face the Cardinals, who are 6-2 at home. Conversely, Atlanta is 7-1 at home, while Arizona is just 3-5 away.

Simply put, the NFL should return to the three-division format, with three division winners and three wild cards, or award playoff berths to the top six teams in each conference regardless of division.

If you're a New England fan and your team missed the playoffs at 11-5, this is not a crazy idea.

Nor is the idea that an 8-8 or 9-7 team that's been largely mediocre all year, has little chance of running the table and winning the Super Bowl.

If the NFL is going to keep the format the way it is—and naturally, they will—at the very least give the team with the best record the home game. What kind of message does it send the Colts that they had the second-best record in football, and have to play in the building of a team that won a division comprised of the Chiefs, Raiders, and Broncos—teams that combined only won three more games than Indy did.

In fact, the entire AFC West won 23 games. That's one fewer than the Titans and Colts combined! Same in the NFC West, which combined for 22 wins, one fewer than the Panthers and Falcons combined.

Clearly, there are divisions that are weak and do not deserve a home playoff game just for being the best of the worst in their exceedingly small corner of the NFL universe. While one can argue for it making things more interesting, it's unfair to very good teams in very good divisions, to be watching, or traveling, when they deserve better.

Pats? Colts? Falcons? 34-14. Not one playoff home game between them.

Chargers? Cardinals? 17-15. They'll be smiling and happy to roll out the red carpet, with nothing to lose and everything to gain.

Denver Broncos Defense Truly Offensive

Scott Goll — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 15:17:51 -0500

As this article is being authored, the Broncos-Chargers game is not technically over, but in all aspects it is—down 24 points in the fourth, and with one San Diego punt in the game, no sense waiting for the final gun to put "pen to paper."

I'm now wondering how its come to pass that a franchise once founded primarily on a gifted defense, has fallen to such a pitiful level.

The Mike Shanahan era has been a wonderful period for the Broncos, no ifs ands or buts. We've witnessed an offensive mastermind, and a team well-constructed to put many points on the board for years to come.

The glamour of a creative offense, a strong-armed young gun in Jay Cutler, gifted young receivers in Brandon Marshall and Eddie Royal. A revitalized offensive line bolstered by Ryan Clady. Promise for the running game with Peyton Hillis and perhaps others.

All meaningless.

Just like pitching wins championships in baseball, goaltending in hockey...you get the picture. If you can shut down the other team—defense—you always have a chance to win.

It has been a long time since Denver has had a legitimate pass rusher. Quarterbacks generally have all day to throw the ball. Relying on Champ Bailey and Dre Bly to constantly run their tails off and save the team's bacon, just isn't a strategy, it's insanity.

The Broncos absolutely must address their shortcomings in the pass rush, and the run stop. Whether free agency is the answer, or the draft, or a little of both, the point is moot.

It's time to abandon the long-used, oft-maligned (and rightly so) strategy of the "small but quick" linemen and linebackers. Watching the Broncos manhandled week after week has become sickening, demoralizing, and flat out unacceptable.

A team with the offensive talent to outscore virtually team in the league, only needs a mediocre defense to be a playoff team. After three years of being far short of mediocre on the defensive side of the ball, isn't it high time Denver gets closer to the Orange Crush, instead of this Orange Mush?

52 points? You'd expect this of the Lions.

Deeply sickened and frustrated, perhaps I'll be back with more constructive thoughts with the passing of time. Maybe not.

Broncos Sign Sammy Winder, Gerald Willhite to the Practice Squad

Scott Goll — Sun, 28 Dec 2008 01:40:17 -0500

In preparation for the inevitable injury to Tatum Bell and at least one other newly-signed-from-practice-squad running back in tonight's pivotal Broncos-Chargers Week 17 match-up, Denver has reportedly signed veteran RB's Sammy Winder and Gerald Willhite.

While there is no guarantee the Broncos will make the playoffs, Mike Shanahan wanted to be prepared for a possible first-round matchup with the Indianapolis Colts, by having a veteran presence in the backfield.

Winder and Willhite, both 49-year-olds, played for the Broncos in the 1980's and were staples of the running game in the early Elway years.

"Sammy and Gerald are quality players, quality people, and will provide leadership in the locker room," said Shanahan. "I believe, if called upon, they will do the job. At 300 pounds, each will be able to move the pile a-la Peyton Hillis, and I'm pretty sure Willhite can still do a back-flip, which is sure to inspire the team."

An unnamed source has confirmed that Steve Sewell, Bobby Humphrey, and Derek Loville, all have pending offers to join the practice squad, should Winder or Willhite meet their untimely demise due to natural causes, prior to next week's potential playoff game.

In other news, with Champ Bailey's groin still gimpy, the Broncos have reached out to Le-Lo Lang to feel out his interest in a return to the NFL.

New Jersey Is One Devil of a Team

Scott Goll — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 06:41:02 -0500

It has long been said by NHL naysayers that the Devils' success over the past decade and a half has been all about Martin Brodeur and not so much the other 19 guys on the ice.

Make no mistake, you can make an argument that without Brodeur, perhaps New Jersey has no Stanley Cups—he is after all, a sure-fire Hall of Famer and a lock to shatter Patrick Roy's all-time victory total.

He will undoubtedly end his career with the most shutouts ever, to go along with the requisite hardware: Vezina Trophies, Stanley Cup trophies, not to mention the Conn Smythe that was gifted to sure-fire non-Hall-of-Famer Jean-Sebastian Giguere in 2003.

All deserving accolades to No. 30 aside, one must be sure to look at the teams in front of him, and even more strikingly now, the team playing in his absence.

Through the perennial purge of talent, be it via fiscal prudence, or free agents ripped from them by those desperate to outbid their services, the Devils not only have managed to stay competitive, but remain near the top of standings.

Most observers of the game would suspect New Jersey's place in the standings would currently be outside-looking-in, having lost Brodeur to injury so early in the year, with little chance of his return until March.

Instead, the Devils' point total is top-10 in the NHL, despite having played fewer games than all but one. In comparison, the much-talked-about Rangers, have six more points—having played five more games.

Much of the credit goes to the Devils' mantra—defense. But this is not the two-goals-per-game squad of certain years past either. The commitment to keep the puck out of the net, and Scott Clemmensen's unexpected brilliant play, has been buffeted by a lineup showing some punch.

These Devils are putting the biscuit in the basket at the rate of just over three per game.

You can thank budding superstar Zach Parise. You can thank the resurgent offensive game of Patrik Elias and Brian Gionta. Travis Zajac and Dainius Zubrus are contributing more than in 2007, and captain Jamie Langenbrunner is always a steady two-way influence.

New Jersey continues to show it is, and always has been, more than a one-man show.

Just imagine what that show might be like, getting a healthy, well-rested Brodeur back in time to shake off the rust and prepare for what could be a long playoff run. It's something noteworthy to consider, since he's been subjected to 70-game seasons in years' past. At times, he's proven to be a touch off by the time the grueling schedule and spring heat takes its toll.

You can talk San Jose, Detroit, Boston, or several other quality NHL teams and their chances for lifting Lord Stanley's Cup next spring—but don't rule out the tenants of the Prudential Center. Pretty soon, the Devils might just have more than a "Piece of the Rock" in their possession.

Broncos-Chargers: Thoughts on Sunday Play-in Game

Scott Goll — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 03:32:03 -0500

I'm excited for Sunday night's "it should never have come to this" game in San Diego.

Making the playoffs, even if it's only a formality, would be a good achievement for a team that has been absent from the postseason recently.

Let's be honest, though—there are no realistic expectations that a victory over the Chargers would propel my beloved Broncos on a Giants-like run to the Super Bowl.

This game would serve two purposes:

1) The obvious: Making the playoffs, even at 9-7, means something.

2) Seeing what Jay Cutler can do under pressure on a bigger stage.

Nobody is going to confuse this injury-riddled team, with major defensive problems yet to be resolved, as a top contender. Yet, for a young team with a power-packed offense (even with a half-dozen starting RBs on the shelf) there is a potential to make a little noise in the playoffs—if the offense led by Cutler is at its highest level.

Keeping the opposing team's offense off the field, and minimizing the exposure of Denver's defense to it, could work wonders. The cliché that "the best offense is a good defense" actually would suit the Broncos in reverse.

First though, they must get past a tough, underrated Chargers team, that is playing much better football than Denver. A team that still has LT, Philip Rivers, and a defense that can make plays.

For whatever reason, the Broncos have played better on the road this year, under hostile conditions. The good weather of sunny California can't hurt the passing game of Cutler, that's for sure.

Either way, this has been a Jekyll-and-Hyde team all year long. If the good Broncos can show up two weeks in a row, all will be forgotten—that'll mean an appearance in the playoffs, and a revenge-victory against the Colts in Denver next week.

By no means is either one of the those scenarios a given, but I think I speak for all Denver fans that it would be worth the trials and tribulations of 2008, to end the year with a little Mile High Magic.

John Elway habitually took undermanned teams to the playoffs early in his career and made the most of what he had. The comparisons of Cutler to Elway are unfair and eventually need to stop. Yet the evolution of Cutler from good, to great, will be justified largely by what he shows he can do in situations just like the one he's about to face.

Broncos' Early Season Thin Ice: 2007 Redux?

Scott Goll — Sun, 21 Sep 2008 23:38:10 -0400

The first three games of 2008 seem strikingly similar to the first three of 2007 in many ways. 2007 was a season that began with excitement and promise, and then turned ugly in a hurry. The question is, is this season different, or a variation of a trend?

Last year, the Broncos won their first three games in a heart palpitating style, knocking off Buffalo, Oakland, and then later Pittsburgh to end a three-game skid. Yesterday's nailbiter to beat New Orleans differentiated the Broncos' current season by vaulting to 3-0, but showed that there may not be a huge difference in the current Denver squad and its predecessor.

Denver got breaks again Sunday. This time, however, the gifts were from its opponent and not Ed Hochuli. Two missed field goals, including the potential go-ahead score from Martin Gramatica late in the fourth, were main factors in the squeaker win.

Factor in a missed two-point conversion the Broncos foiled earlier in the game, and a fumble by Tony Scheffler deep in Saints territory in the final stanza, and you have just a few of the places where a break here or there turned the fortunes of the game.

Once again, not a game for the faint of heart.

The Broncos continue to put points on the board—34 more in a two-point victory over New Orleans. Denver has by far scored the most points in the NFL after three weeks. Yet they've also coughed up large chunks of yards and points themselves, allowing the third MOST points in the league.

Denver should be able to stop the bleeding Sunday against an anemic Chiefs team, but the game is in Kansas City, typically a house of horrors, no matter the teams' records. The Broncos are likely to return home in Week Five for a matchup against the Bucs as the 4-0 AFC West leaders.

Critical matchups follow with Jacksonville and New England prior to the bye.

This column will be on hiatus for a week or two, as I head off to Jamaica to do a little scouting on the beach for defensive help.