NFL Week 1 Fantasy Surprises

Here's a look at some of the unexpected top fantasy performers in Week 1 of the 2017 NFL season, and what they're each likely to do (or not do) going forward.

We'll start with the first game of the year, where the Chiefs went into Foxboro and stunned just about everyone by scoring six touchdowns (three in the fourth quarter) in a 42-27 victory over the Patriots. Alex Smith (28-for-35, 368 yards, four TDs) handily out-dueled Tom Brady (16-for-36, 267 yards), and a rookie running back many people had never heard of put on a show for the ages. Don't expect a repeat of either of those again in Week 2.

After fumbling on his first pro carry, Kareem Hunt rushed 17 times for 148 yards and a touchdown, while also catching five passes for 98 yards and two more TDs. He's obviously not going to do that on a regular basis, but Hunt will definitely get plenty of opportunities when Kansas City hosts the Eagles next week.

For the Patriots, newcomer Mike Gillislee rushed for 45 yards and three touchdowns. Might Gillislee step right into the role that led to a team-record 18 rushing touchdowns for LeGarrette Blount last season? Maybe, but it also took Gillislee 15 carries to reach his 45-yard total and he was twice stuffed in fourth-and-short situations. With Brady looking to get back on track in New Orleans in Week 2, New England is likely to air it out. Long-term, there's also a logjam in the Pats' backfield, so it'll be difficult for Gillislee to maintain a consistent workload.

There was a lot of talk about the Bears' Jordan Howard (52 yards and a touchdown on 13 carries, as well as three catches for 14 yards in Chicago's 23-17 loss to the Falcons) heading into the season, but in Week 1 he was overshadowed by his rookie backfield mate Tarik Cohen (66 yards on five attempts, plus eight catches for 47 yards and a TD). For those playing daily fantasy on DRAFT, it may be wise to avoid Howard next week while Chicago explores what they have in Cohen.

In the Lions 35-23 win over the Cardinals, Matt Stafford threw for 292 yards and four touchdowns, two of which went to first-year wide receiver Kenny Golladay (four catches for 69 yards). Golladay was targeted seven times compared to 12 for Golden Tate (10 receptions for 107 yards), so don't go counting on the rookie to put up No. 1 receiver numbers any time soon.

It was a big weekend for surprising showings from quarterbacks. In addition to Smith and Stafford, other top QB performers included Philly's Carson Wentz (26-for-39, 307 yards, two touchdowns), the Bills' Tyrod Taylor (16-for-28, 224 yards, two TDs and 38 yards on the ground) and Browns rookie DeShone Kizer (20-for-30, 220 yards, one passing TD and one rushing TD, plus 17 rushing yards). Of that unlikely bunch, Stafford is the one with the best chance to remain a top-5 quarterback in Week 2 and beyond.




Follow @LucidSportsFan

NFL futures bets I'd make if I was a betting man

The 2017 NFL season kicks off Thursday, September 7th, when the defending Super Bowl champion New England Patriots host the Kansas City Chiefs. To the surprise of no one, the Patriots are the odds-on favorites to take home the title once again, despite a now 40-year-old Tom Brady having just lost his No. 1 wide receiver for the season (Julian Edelman tore his ACL in Friday's exhibition victory in Detroit).

New England is currently listed at +400 to capture the sixth championship of Brady's career next February in Super Bowl LII (that's 52 for those who aren't Roman-numerically inclined). The Pats are also +225 to win the AFC.

The teams with the next-best odds to take home the Lombardi Trophy are a pair of NFC clubs, the Seattle Seahawks and the Green Bay Packers, both listed at +1000. In the AFC, the Patriots' greatest challenger is expected to be the Pittsburgh Steelers, who are +450 to represent the conference in the Super Bowl and +1100 to win it all.

After the Steelers, the Oakland Raiders (+800), Denver Broncos (+900) and Chiefs (+1000) round out the list of top contenders for the AFC title. With the Patriots such an overwhelming favorite, the other three teams in the AFC East all rank among the bottom six in terms of conference title odds: The Miami Dolphins are +2200, the Buffalo Bills are +4000, and the New York Jets are +6600.

So who is a good bet in the AFC? Honestly, nobody. There's not much money to be made on the Pats at +225 and there aren't any teams out there that have a compelling case to unseat New England. If I had to put $100 on somebody to win the conference, I might take the Raiders at +800 or even the Indianapolis Colts at +1800.

For me, it all comes down to the quarterback. Derek Carr emerged as budding star last year and even though he doesn't have much behind him, I like Andrew Luck's chances at +1800 better than a lot of other guys'.

Here are some other football odds I like heading into the 2017 season:

Green Bay Packers at +500 to win the NFC: Aaron Rodgers has guided Green Bay to the playoffs in eight straight years, but only reached one Super Bowl. He's due.

New Orleans Saints at + 2000 to win the NFC: I'll take a 38-year-old Drew Brees over most of the other QBs in the conference, but only five squads have worse odds than the Saints.

Minnesota Vikings at + 2500 to win the Super Bowl: The Vikings are +1200 in the NFC, which suggests their expected to lose Super Bowl LII if they get there--despite the fact that it's going to be played in their own stadium.



Follow @LucidSportsFan

The bizarre September 11 connection between Tom Brady and Jimmy Garoppolo

In the aftermath of September 11, 2001, the NFL postponed its games the following weekend.  The Patriots returned to the field on September 23 against the New York Jets.  New England trailed 10-3 with five minutes remaining in the fourth quarter when Mo Lewis delivered that fateful hit on Drew Bledsoe.  It was in that moment that Tom Brady's NFL legacy began (sidebar--I can't help but wonder, if September 11th had never happened, is it possible Tom Brady would've never become Tom Brady?).

Fast forward 15 years later, will September 11, 2016 go down as the day Jimmy Garoppolo's career truly began?  After he worked out his "Holy $#!&, I'm starting an NFL game" jitters on the very first play (in which he air-mailed Chris Hogan)...

@LucidSportsFan got his first pass, he was cucumber cool out there after. pic.twitter.com/UUlPYzEIIs

— larry (@larlef) September 12, 2016

...I don't think I would've noticed the difference if that'd been Garoppolo out there in a Brady jersey.


Follow @LucidSportsFan

My impression of every Bill Simmons NFL podcast

Despite the terrible trailer for his new TV show, I'm a big fan of Bill Simmons.  In particular, his podcasts are fantastic.  However, there's one thing that happens every time he discusses the NFL, usually with his friend "Cousin Sal," that really bugs me.  They have a habit of breaking down each team's schedule as if it's the most difficult stretch of games the league has ever seen.  The conversations always sound something like this:

"Cousin Sal, are we sure (Team X) is really that good? They're 1-1 right now. Take a look at their next four weeks: They play against an NFL team this Sunday at 4 pm. Then they have a short week and have to take on another NFL team on Thursday night. After that, they go on the road and play yet another NFL ballclub, before travelling all the way to (City Y) and facing a fourth straight squad that plays in the NFL at 1 pm on the West Coast. That's just a brutal schedule. Don't you think they could easily be 2-4 heading into Week 7?"

This type of schedule talk is especially irksome when it occurs before the season even starts--nobody has any idea yet which games will actually turn out to be tough matchups (listen to Sal's take on the Jets at the 22:30 mark of their most recent podcast).


Follow @LucidSportsFan

Ray Lewis thinks God wants Michael Phelps to win as many golds as Lewis' high school football number

As far as infuriating tweets go, this one is pretty high on the list:

21 gold metals, when U reach 22 you will be at my high school jersey number. Don't tell me God isn't Intentional, let's go Lil bro. USA!!!

— Ray Lewis (@raylewis) August 10, 2016

Ignoring the general absurdity of what Lewis seems to believe God's priorities might be, what really irks me about this tweet is that Lewis is self-righteous enough to think anyone would be interested in a correlation between his high school jersey number and Michael Phelps' Olympic gold medals (or metals, haha).  Not to mention, how about the mind-blowing level of egotism involved for him to imply it could actually be a goal Phelps (who's from Baltimore and is, sadly, a Lewis fan) might care about achieving?

To put it lightly, Ray Lewis is not a person I think very highly of (if the picture is any indication).  Click on the many links in this post if you'd like to read about why.


UPDATE: Lewis deleted the tweet, but the embedded text lives on...

Follow @LucidSportsFan

I just read a great take on Deflategate I'd never heard before (shocking, at this point)

The following quote is from an unbiased NBC Sports writer named Joe Posnanski in a piece entitled TOM BRADY IS INNOCENT: Unequivocally, unambiguously, thoroughly and 100-percent innocent.

I underlined the portion of it that's the great point I hadn't heard before:

"Look, the NFL charged him with breaking a rule NO ONE cared about. The NFL cared so little about air pressure in football that they let teams bring their own footballs, which were barely checked. My guess is if Brady wanted the PSI level of football lowered, he simply could have petitioned the NFL and they would have just lowered it — they just wanted to make footballs comfortable for quarterbacks to throw. 

Then, there is no proof at all that Brady ever wanted footballs deflated BELOW the league minimum. We know only that he liked footballs AT the minimum (especially because, as we know, football naturally deflate in cold weather). Even the famed “Deflator” suggested his job was to make sure footballs were not OVERINFLATED."

Posnanksi is dead on with this.  It was a rule the league paid no attention to that guys broke all the time.  If anybody thought it actually mattered, Brady or another QB probably would've gotten the NFL to change it.  And, just because Brady prefers his footballs on the low side in terms of air pressure does not mean he wanted them below the limit--regardless of whether they actually were or not.

I'd like to see someone ask Roger Goodell point-blank "Do you honestly believe Tom Brady should be suspended 25 percent of a season for that?"  Imagine if Adam Silver suspended LeBron James 20 games, roughly the NBA equivalent, for an equipment violation?  (For the record, LeBron wasn't even fined when he ripped his jersey apart during a nationally televised game.)

Also, one thing that hasn't been widely discussed is that Goodell has the option to simply back down.  He's not obligated to uphold the original and absurdly over-the-top penalty decided upon just because the courts ruled it's within his rights to.


Follow @LucidSportsFan

Always going for 2 is a great idea in the NFL, but that's just the beginning...

Earlier this week, Ben Roethlisberger said that he'd prefer his team went for the two-point conversion after every single touchdown--no more extra points.  Drew Brees then publicly agreed with him.  Mathematically, the numbers support their argument.  Here are the stats from last season in the NFL:

Via CBSSports.com

Statistically, clubs scored more points on average last year by going for two.  But in my mind, that's just the beginning--and Brees alluded to this as well (click on the link above)--I want teams to also stop punting.  If I were an NFL coach, I'd go for it on every single fourth down (I'm certain I've written this before somewhere, but I can't seem to find it).

Unlike the conversion numbers above, it's much more difficult to collect relevant data on this, but I feel as though a team that never punted would score more points by extending drives than it would give up by turning the ball over.  I know there's no way this is going to happen in the NFL any time soon, but I'd like to see a major college program commit to it for a full season (maybe a lesser-known school could do it as a publicity stunt, it'd probably help recruit star players on offense as well) and see what happens.

Or even better, the NFL should just eliminate kickers altogether.


Follow @LucidSportsFan

NFL Twitter account hacked, how big a deal is this going to be?

So this happened today:

It took the @NFL account 4+ minutes to delete this obviously hacked tweet. pic.twitter.com/tyidNhfEDL

— Mark Van Deusen (@LucidSportsFan) June 7, 2016

And the @NFL hack is still happening... pic.twitter.com/OB0EISE9Bw

— Mark Van Deusen (@LucidSportsFan) June 7, 2016

How big a story is this going to be?  As people like to say, the NFL "owns a day of the week."  The account has 19.2 million followers (currently listed as the 63rd most-followed account in existence).  The first hacked tweet, and what I assume was a third hacked tweet, came 10 minutes apart.  I can't even imagine the level of freak-out that was going on in the league offices during those 10 minutes...

New playbooks are in pic.twitter.com/RsZEq07VxQ

— Bleacher Report (@BleacherReport) June 7, 2016

Follow @LucidSportsFan

Ray Lewis reportedly out at ESPN - Finally!

According to USA Today's The Big Lead, Ray Lewis is reportedly "on the way out" at ESPN.  I'd like to think this represents the network finally correcting a mistake it never should've made in the first place when it hired Lewis as an NFL analyst shortly after his retirement from football in 2013.

It blows my mind that ESPN (and anyone, for that matter) was able to overlook the role he played in that double-homicide in January of 2000.  My guess is, if social media had existed back then Lewis' entire NFL career never would've happened (a few security cameras outside of the Cobalt Lounge nightclub likely could've kept him out of the league as well).

Yet somehow people magically forgot (or ignored) what he did, and he had a three-year run of saying stupid things on television.

Hopefully I'll never have to see his face in my living room again.


Follow @LucidSportsFan

Four reasons why a Tom Brady suspension might not be so terrible for the Patriots

First and foremost please, please read the title carefully.  I'm not saying a Tom Brady suspension is a good thing.  The words "might not be so terrible" still definitely imply that it's bad.  But now that a week has gone by since the "suspension back on" news, I'm ready to write about it and I've decided to take an optimistic angle.

So if Tom Brady's suspension actually does stick this time around, here's one potential silver lining for each of the four games he'll miss (in reverse order of importance):

1. We'll get an opportunity to see if Jimmy Garrapolo is any good, which might be worth figuring out sooner rather than later.  Brady will be 39 years old by the time the season starts and chances are he's not actually going to play until he's 45.

2. As I mentioned, Brady turns 39 in August.  A shortened, 12-game regular season could be exactly what he needs, just ask Peyton Manning.  Or Roger Clemens, for that matter.

3.  Last season, New England busted out of the gates, but faded down the stretch and fell in the AFC title game (similar to what happened with the 2007 edition that went 16-0 but lost the Super Bowl).

Two years ago the Patriots started slowly, then got hot and won the Super Bowl (as did the 2001 squad that began the season 3-4).  The same is true for a number of other recent NFL champs, including both Giants teams that beat New England.  The point is, early season struggles don't matter--putting it all together for the playoffs does.

4.  The reason the Pats were so good early on last year was because of the massive chip on Brady's shoulder.  That was after his suspension was nullified.  Imagine the fire that will burn inside of him if he's actually forced to sit out the first quarter of the season?

Watch out, NFL.


Follow @LucidSportsFan

It's NFL draft day, and I couldn't care less

No, it's not because the Patriots had their first-round pick taken away (although that doesn't help).  And no, it's not because I'll be at the TD Garden tonight for Celtics-Hawks Game 6, which could be the end of the C's season (but that doesn't help either).

The reason I don't care about the NFL draft is because nobody has any idea which players will actually be good or not, and every year at this time I get incredibly sick of people taking about it.  It seems silly to me to get excited (or annoyed) about guys now, I'd rather just wait and see how they turn out down the road.

If you're interested in reading more of my totally uneducated philosophy on the NFL draft, here it is:

If I ran an NFL franchise, I'd pretty much only draft quarterbacks



Follow @LucidSportsFan

I don't think athletes should ever be expected to talk to the press after heartbreaking losses

If you happened to catch the Northern Iowa postgame press conference yesterday after the Panthers suffered literally the worst collapse in NCAA basketball history, yikes--it was brutal.  The one kid in the middle (pictured above) literally couldn't stop crying, and I don't blame him in the slightest.  I think it's crazy that athletes are asked to speak to the media directly after gut-wrenching losses.  And I don't just mean students, this applies to the pros as well.

I'm not a Cam Newton fan, but I was very sympathetic towards him during his somewhat controversial interaction with the press after the Super Bowl.  Imagine if you'd just undergone one of, if not the most disappointing moment(s) of your life, likely the worst thing that's ever happened in your professional career, and were forced to talk to reporters about it immediately afterwards?  I can't imagine any human being would want to do that, and I doubt very many people are capable of handling it well.

"Hey Jim the investment banker, you blew a multi-million dollar deal this afternoon and are getting transferred to Tulsa tomorrow, how does it feel?"


Follow @LucidSportsFan

Go Plate vs. Snackeez: Which stupid infomercial product would you rather use?

What are the odds I'll be at barbecue sometime this summer where people start handing out Go Plates?  Or, even more intriguing, what if one kooky person shows up with their own Go Plate just for themselves?



I will say this, I'm much more likely to use a Go Plate than I am to wear a GoBelt.  Good luck tossing a football around with a full Go Plate though--that's just a mess waiting to happen for pretty much everybody on Earth besides Odell Beckham Jr.:



But, I do like the idea of having a Go Plate for when you walk up to a table of food.  I never know what to do with my drink in that situation and it's basically impossible to get everything you want to eat unless you set your beverage down somewhere.

The general concept of the Go Plate is the same as the Snackeez--carrying both your food and drink in one hand.

While the Snackeez may provide significantly more security and prevent against spills, it can't hold anywhere near as much.  I'd also be willing to bet the Snackeez is a lot more complicated and time consuming to fill up.  When you factor in the cost (for $9.99 you get 10 Go Plates, but only one Snackeez), the Go Plate is the clear winner in my book.

Go Plate vs. Snackeez: Which stupid infomercial product would you rather use? https://t.co/p7tFcWHQSv

— Mark Vandeusen (@LucidSportsFan) February 4, 2016

RELATED:
Improving the "Dump Cakes" infomercial
"Perfect Polly" takes the cake for depressing "as seen on TV" product commercials
Does anybody own a Stone Wave?
Why would anybody want this "toy" designed for taunting your cat?
"Forever Lazy" is out of their mind with their marketing



Follow @LucidSportsFan

What if Tom Brady and Peyton Manning switched places?

I'm not talking about for all time, or even this full season--I mean just for last Sunday's matchup.  And obviously this can't be taken literally with them simply each walking to the other side of the field before the AFC Championship Game.  What I'm asking is, what would've happened if Tom Brady was the Broncos quarterback (fully assimilated to his new teammates and system) and Peyton Manning was on the Patriots?

Before I venture a guess, I have to admit that I didn't come up with this idea on my own, I heard it on Bill Simmons' podcast.

Brady got knocked down 23 times last week by an outstanding Denver defense--nearly twice as many hits as he had absorbed in any game during the course of the season.  Yet somehow, he was still able to lead his club on a final drive that got them within a failed two-point conversion of sending the game to overtime.

Manning, on the other hand, guided the Broncos to just three points and four total first downs in the second half.  He didn't record a single first down on eight of 14 total possessions.  Imagine what might've happened had he been beaten up by the Denver defense all day?  My guess is the Patriots would've been shutout with Manning at the helm instead of Brady.

Score prediction if they switched places?  Brady/Broncos 31, Manning/Patriots 0.

According to My Top Sportsbooks, Carolina is favored by 4.5 points over Denver in Super Bowl 50.  But what if the Broncos had Brady under center instead of Manning?  A line of even money sounds about right, although it wouldn't surprise me at all if Brady's squad was expected to win.  In that case, I'd say Brady/Broncos 31, Panthers 28.

As it is, I'll take Panthers 35, Manning/Broncos 17.  The Panthers' score differs by seven because unlike Brady, I expect Manning to throw an interception that leads to a touchdown.


Follow @LucidSportsFan

I guarantee you can't name the quarterbacks going to the Pro Bowl

Every year the NFL Pro Bowl becomes more and more of a disgrace.  All the Patriots chosen are backing out.  None of the five quarterbacks selected are going--and how is it five, by the way?  Shouldn't there be the same number on each team?  Hmm... Maybe there aren't even teams anymore?  I honestly don't know.  I remember hearing something a few years ago about it no longer be AFC vs. NFC, and I think maybe there are captains who draft players like a schoolyard pickup game?  I'd look it up, but I don't care enough to find out.

The guy pictured above is one of the five QBs going.  I'm willing to bet most people don't know who he is, even with the photo.  Below is a screenshot of the sad list of quarterbacks who will be playing in the exhibition:

I could do some research and look up how not-Pro-Bowl-worthy their stats are, but I don't think this pathetic joke of a "game" is worth that much effort on my part.


UPDATE: So apparently I was wrong about some things--there are six QBs, and Russell Wilson who was originally chosen is going.  Amazingly nobody who read this knew or cared enough to tell me that, which further proves my point about how stupid the whole thing is.


Follow @LucidSportsFan

Lucid thoughts on the Patriots' AFC championship loss in Denver

I wish the Patriots had never called a single running play.  They were all just wasted downs.

Even though they didn't convert either time, going for it on fourth down on the two unsuccessful late drives was the right move.  If they'd kicked a field goal they still needed a touchdown anyway.  When you're that close with so little time left, you try to get that touchdown.

It was amazing that Stephen Gostkowski made it this long without missing an extra point.  Not just his unbreakable NFL-record streak dating back to 2006, but this year alone.  Only four other regular kickers were perfect all season on the new long extra points, and none of them were even close to Gostkowski's 55-for-55.  Mason Crosby was second at 39-for-39.

If you ask me, New England lost the game when they decided not to play offense at the end of the first half.  The Pats got the ball at their own 12-yard line trailing 14-9 with 2:26 to go.  They chose to run on first down and let the clock tick away till the two-minute warning.  Their attempt to kill the clock before halftime eventually failed, and the Broncos kicked a field goal anyway.  If the Patriots use their regular offense there instead, maybe they go down and score, maybe they don't.  But, there's also a good chance they move the ball and stop Denver from scoring.

Then, behind 17-9, the Pats got it back again with 33 seconds remaining at their own 20-yard line.  Why not throw a pass or two and see if you can get in field goal range?  Instead, they knelt on the ball.

Two possessions they just gave away.  If they get a field goal on either, or just hang on to the ball long enough to prevent the Broncos field goal, it's a totally different game.

I wish they'd had some sort of trick play in the bag for the two-point conversion--something they'd been saving all year for that situation.  Off the top of my head, how about a reverse to Julian Edelman who then tosses the ball to an open guy in the end zone when the defenders step up to keep him from crossing the goal line?

And finally, I'm really not looking forward to two weeks of hype surrounding Peyton Manning and how he got Denver back to the Super Bowl.  The Broncos win had nothing to do with him.  Their defense gets 100 percent of the credit.

Tom Brady was hit a season-high 23 times Sunday. He hadn't taken more than 12 hits in a game this season prior to Sunday.

— ESPN Stats & Info (@ESPNStatsInfo) January 25, 2016

If Manning had been good yesterday his team would've won by two or three touchdowns.  He took brutal sacks.  He had no chance on third and longs, to the point that Denver just ran the ball up the middle to improve punt position.  Manning missed open guys all day, including in the end zone.  He couldn't get a single first down on two possessions late in the fourth quarter, giving the Pats two extra chances to tie the game.  His offense managed only 12 first downs and 244 total yards for the entire game.  The Broncos won in spite of Manning, not because of him.


Follow @LucidSportsFan

Do you know how bad Peyton Manning has been this year?

Let's start with touchdown passes.  How many times has Peyton Manning thrown a touchdown pass this season?



Nine.  Manning only has nine touchdown passes this year.  He's played 11 games.  His nine TDs are tied for 31st overall among quarterbacks (in case you forgot, there are 32 teams in the NFL).  For comparison, Tom Brady has thrown a league-best 38 touchdowns in 17 games.  Manning has also completed just one TD pass at home in Denver this season.  ONE!  In the lone game Brady already played there, he tossed three.

Now let's look at Manning's interceptions.  Manning has been picked 17 times this year, the second-highest total in the NFL behind Blake Bortles' 18 (although Bortles played 16 games).  The Broncos win over the Steelers Sunday was the first game all season Manning started and did not throw an interception.

Brady, on the other hand, has gone without a pick in 11 outings this year.  Manning has also been intercepted multiple times in five of his 10 starts.  That's only happened to Brady once.


Follow @LucidSportsFan

Apparently "basic fairness" is a rule in the NFL now (and maybe they should use it more often?)

On the overtime coin flip during the Cardinals win over the Packers Saturday, the coin didn't actually flip.  The ref immediately said the toss was not valid and flipped it again.  Arizona won both times, so there wasn't much of an issue.  Still, there was some confusion and people wondered whether or not the coin actually should have been re-flipped.  Sunday, the NFL made a statement.

Via ESPN.com:

"There is nothing in the rulebook that specifies [a required flip]," NFL spokesman Michael Signora said in a statement. "But the referee used his judgment to determine that basic fairness dictated that the coin should flip for the toss to be valid. That is why he retossed the coin."

If you ask me the NFL should go with this "basic fairness" line a lot more often.  Was it a catch?  Was it a fumble?  Is it pass interference?  Was the quarterback's arm going forward?  There are too many rules that are open to interpretation, and nobody ever knows what the call is going to be after the replay review.  Rather than come up with a technical explanation every time that people don't buy anyway, why not just admit it's a judgement call?

"Yeah, it was a catch, because it looked like a catch and, you know, basic fairness."


Follow @LucidSportsFan

A 12-4 record is great for most NFL teams, but average for the Patriots

The Patriots finished 2015 at 12-4.  It's the fourth straight 12-4 regular season campaign for New England.  On the right is the complete list of Pats records since 2001, the year Tom Brady took over as starting quarterback.

For the past 15 seasons, 12-4 is the average record for the Patriots--slightly below average actually, considering the numbers work out to 12.13 wins and 3.87 losses per year.

In 2015, New England's 12-4 mark was good enough to earn the No. 2 seed in the AFC.  According to My Top Sportsbooks, the Pats have 6/1 odds to win the Super Bowl, tied with the Panthers for second-best after the Cardinals at 5/1 (quick sidebar: Brady is also the top bet of any player at the moment to win the Super Bowl MVP at 15/1, just ahead of Carolina quarterback Cam Newton at 18/1 and Arizona QB Carson Palmer at 20/1).

Most teams would be thrilled to be where New England is at the moment, but for the Patriots it's just business as usual--for the last decade-and-a-half.

Here's where things get crazy: Over the 15-year span that the Pats have averaged slightly more than 12 regular-season wins, there are seven NFL franchises that have never won 12 games: Miami, New York (Jets), Buffalo, Cleveland, Oakland, Washington and Detroit.  Two more clubs, Arizona and Cincinnati, just won 12 for the first time since 2001 this year.


Follow @LucidSportsFan

The Rams should have to forfeit their championship in St. Louis as a penalty for moving back to L.A.

Vacated.

There are two points I'd like to make here:

1. I don't think major pro sports franchises should be allowed to move anymore.  It's no longer 1955 where the only way you can see Mickey Mantle is to go to a game at Yankee Stadium.

In 2016, you can be a fan of literally any team you choose and watch them play on a hand-held device from just about anywhere in the world.  The actual spot where franchises are located is becoming less and less important.  And I don't want to here about how "you need a big market to fill a stadium" blah blah blah.  There's one easy recipe that always draws fans to games, no matter the location: Have a good team.

Which brings me to my second point...

2. The Rams sold out 95 straight games in St. Louis from when they first moved there in 1995 through their peak Kurt Warner/Marshall Faulk years of the late 1990s/early 2000s.  Now they stink, things are bad, and they want out.  But that already happened once before, when they left Los Angeles in the first place.  And now they're going back there?  Are you kidding me?  They're like a spoiled little child who decides he doesn't like the toy he has and cries until he gets a different one, but then when he's given a new one he realizes the first one was better after all.

How is that OK?  Why not teach the Rams a lesson, NFL?  I don't think the league should've let them return in the first place, but since it is happening, there should at least be a penalty.  If I were the supreme leader/commander/all-powerful-being in charge of the NFL, I'd tell the Rams this:

"Oh, you don't like St. Louis anymore?  You want to move back to L.A.?  Fine.  But if St. Louis is no longer good enough for you, you don't get to have that Super Bowl XXXIV title in your record books.  That 23-16 victory on January 30, 2000 officially never happened."


Follow @LucidSportsFan