What We Learned from the 2011 NFL Season

256 regular season games and 10 post-season games have boiled down to the New England Patriots facing off against the New York Football Giants in Indianapolis. But before taking a look forward to that game, we should take a look at the 266 games that have already been played, and see what we have learned from them.

Here are 5 takeaways from the NFL season:

1. Tight Ends are the hottest position in the NFL:

I have tweeted it before, but reject basketball players take note, teams across the NFL will be looking for big, strong, tall, and athletic guys who can catch footballs. Before this season, a tight end had never amassed 1,300 yards receiving in a single season. This year, two players did it: Rob Gronkowski (1,327) and Jimmy Graham (1,310). These two players were also two of the five players to score more than 10 receiving touchdowns, and Gronkowski led the league with 17 grabs in the end zone. 14 of the top 50 receivers in the NFL this season were tight ends. The list of accolades goes on for players such as: Aaron Hernandez, Vernon Davis, Jason Witten, Antonio Gates, Tony Gonzalez, Dustin Keller, Brent Celek, and Jermichael Finley.

The fact of the matter is this, tight ends cause match-up problems for defenses especially in the red zone and on third down, the most crucial areas of the game to convert in order to find success. Just get used to talking about your team’s tight end and selecting a tight end a few rounds earlier in your fantasy draft.

2. 5,000 is the new 2,000:

Remember when there was a huge countdown during the 1997 season to the moment when Barry Sanders hit the 2,000 rushing yard mark for the season? He was only the third player to ever hit that mark, joining O.J. Simpson (1973) and Eric Dickerson (1984). The year after that, Terrell Davis would hit the 2,000 yard mark and since Sanders became the third player to hit the 2,000 yard mark, the number of players to hit that plateau has doubled to 6. The 2,000 yard mark used to be hallowed ground, and still is, but 4 players doing it in a 12 year period of time, makes it a little less so. This season, however has made another plateau the new mark that will begin to be hit with some level of consistency: The 5,000 passing yard mark.

Before the 2008 season, only one player, Dan Marino, had ever thrown for 5,000 yards in a single season. Then Drew Brees hit that mark in the 2008 season. Three years later, this season, three different players hit the mark: Drew Brees (again), Tom Brady, and Matthew Stafford. Eli Manning missed the mark by a mere 67 yards. It comes as no shock that 8 of the top 10 single season passing totals have come since the year 2000, and that 7 of 10 have come after 2006. This is a milestone that will begin to be hit with some amount of regularity as the game has shifted so drastically to passing.

3. Defense may win championships, but offense gets you to the playoffs:

The old adage is that defense wins championships. To win a championship, however, you must first get to the playoffs. Of the 12 teams that made the playoffs this season, 11 ranked in the top 10 of either passing or rushing offense. On the other side, only 6 of the teams had a defense that ranked in the top 10 of either passing or rushing defense. 9 of the top 12 teams in the league in terms of points scored made the playoffs, but only 5 of the top 12 teams in points allowed made the playoffs. Its just that simple, offense gets you to the playoffs.

4. The next record to fall will the be the single season sack record:

This is seemingly common sense based off of the first three points that were made. Teams are dropping back to throw the ball at a steadily increasing rate, 11 teams this season dropped back to pass the ball more than 575 times, an increase of 3 from the previous season. This means more chances of teams to record sacks, 14 teams recorded more than 40 sacks this past season (as compared to only 9 last year). Jared Allen recorded 22 sacks this season, just .5 short of the mark set by Michael Strahan (on a gift sack of Brett Favre, who called the play for Strahan and just slid down on his side of the line, but I am not bitter as a huge Vikings and Jared Allen fan).

Similar to the trend of more athletic and terrifyingly intense tight ends, there is a growing emphasis and success of athletic and intense big men flying off of the edges for football teams. Guys like Jason Pierre-Paul, DeMarcus Ware, Brian Orakpo, Elvis Dumervil, Mario Williams, and Terrell Suggs are called upon to disrupt quarterbacks with pressure with increasing regularity and worry about the run later. There is a huge stock of big men with motors that just keep running on passing downs and that means that Strahan’s mark will fall within 3 seasons.

5. The Wildcat, Option, and other gimmicky looks are here to stay:

Gimmick offensive sets and looks are here to stay in the NFL. Teams may not build around option style offenses (see Tebow), but teams will continually look for ways to keep defenses off balance and this is one of the best ways to do that. Hybrid quarterbacks, running backs, wide receivers, and tight ends will continue to find spots on NFL rosters. The days of a simple two receiver, one tight end, one half-back, one fullback look for a majority of the game are over. You may not like it, but embrace Aaron Hernandez lining up alone in the backfield or Percy Harvin taking snaps at quarterback, because they now have an established foothold in the NFL.

NFL Championship Weekend Handicapper

Baltimore at New England (-7)

Offense:  Who would you rather follow into battle?  The guy who looks and throws like Bert?  Or George Washington?  I mean seriously, I know Tom Brady hasn’t brought his Patriots to post-season glory recently, but he has won 3 Super Bowls.  He puts up numbers that Joe Flacco couldn’t even put up at Delaware against defenses that Tim Tebow could shred with his arm.  Brady makes throws that Flacco can’t make in video games.  And this isn’t mentioning the fact that (unlike the last time the Ravens ousted the Pats from the playoffs) Brady has two of the best safety valves in Gronkowski and Hernandez and the best underneath receiver in Welker.

Defense:  No one is debating who is better here.  The clear answer is the Ravens.  That being said, however, the debate that rages now:  Is the Ravens defense more overrated as the third ranked defense or is the Patriots defense more underrated as the 31^st ranked defense, is a good one.  The Patriots are playing better and coming together now more so than any point in the year.  We have seen them start to get some consistent pressure on the quarterback and look better in coverage.  The Ravens are clearly the better defense, but with the exception of some key interceptions on terrible decisions by the rookie T.J. Yates, they did not look nearly as vaunted as they have been (and were when they last made an appearance in and won the Super Bowl).

So the Ravens will win because:  T-Sizzle decides to show himself and actually hit Tom Brady and he knocks him out of the game.  Seriously though, the Ravens HAVE to get to Tom Brady while finding a way to neutralize the underneath routes to Gronkowski, Hernandez, and Welker while also shutting down any semblance of a running game like the one that the Texans established against them last week.

So the Patriots will win because:  Tom Brady and Bill Belichick continue to play with an apparent chip on their shoulders because they haven’t performed in the playoffs recently.  Tom Brady, arguably, has more and better weapons this year than he ever has and it is time for him to once again lead his team through the rest of the NFL.  Also the Patriots did arguably the smartest thing I have seen them do in a long time in terms of game planning.  Look for the same formation of Hernandez in the backfield that yielded some good runs last week, but this time Hernandez will be used to chip Suggs off the edge and catch some short passes that could turn into some big gains, and if the Ravens cheat, they can always run the ball out of that formation still.

Pick:  Patriots.

New York (N) (I put the “N” to really shove it in the faces of Jets fans that they aren’t playing this week) at San Francisco (-2.5)

Offense:  Well up until last week, everyone in the football world thought that in San Francisco they spelled offense “G-O-R-E.”  Now they have “The Catch 2.0” or whatever you want to call it, and they are ready to crown their new dynasty.  Lets not get ahead of ourselves.  Eli Manning is playing better than ANY quarterback in the 4^th quarter right now.  His receivers trust him and he seems to have the leadership qualities that have made Peyton so successful (about time).  Kevin Gilbride is the biggest problem for this offense, seriously when will he learn that Brandon Jacobs plays like he weighs 100 lbs.

Defense:  The 49ers defense is the strength of this team.  Their line, linebacking corps, and secondary are all strong.  They will need to come into the game and hit the Giants in the mouth early and often, and keep that pace through out the game.  The Giants’ d-line and secondary are scary for two very different reasons.  Their d-line is absurdly good and deep.  Their secondary could be the biggest underachieving unit in the NFL, they have 4 first-round picks and 2 second-round picks and yet they ranked 29^th in passing defense.

So the Giants will win because:  The defensive line gets to, and rattles Alex Smith.  Eli Manning should have a good game.  That being said, the 49ers defense is stout enough that the Giants defense will need to make some stops.  They need to keep Frank Gore bottled up to the extent that forces Alex Smith to do some work on 3^rd down.  They are very capable of doing this, but they need to execute their game plan on both sides of the ball (and have a decent one on the offensive side of the ball).

So the 49ers will win because:  Jim Harbaugh has had and will continue to have one of the greatest coaching seasons in recent Big 4 (NFL, NHL, MLB, NBA) sports history.  Seriously, this guy could will LeBron James to win a championship in the 4^th quarter if he got the shot.  If this team can avoid panic and stick to the game plan that allowed them to be successful all year, including against the Giants (although a much less hot Giants team), then they could find themselves in the Super Bowl.

Pick:  Giants (and to win).

NFL Divisional Round Handicapper

New Orleans at San Francisco (+3.5)

Why the Saints will win:

Does anyone really believe that Jim Harbaugh has, in one year, transformed Alex Smith into a NFC Championship game QB from the terrible first pick bust that he had been for so many years?  No.  Does anyone believe that the 49ers defense is as good as the numbers say they are after they played six games in the mid-major of NFL divisions?  No.  A team can only impose its physical will on another team if it can catch them; the Saints’ offense runs circles around everyone they play.

Why the 49ers will win:

Everyone has seen the numbers about Drew Brees’ reduced effectiveness away from home.  If you haven’t, he is 9-0 at home, but 5-3 on the road.  In the regular season he threw 29 TDs at home, but only 17 away.  But what is the one thing that everyone needs to know?  Saints can make all teams from the mid-major NFC West look like the Butler of the NFL.  Its like terrible teams are the Saints’ kryptonite.

Pick:  Saints.

Denver at New England (-13.5)

Why the Broncos will win:

Here we go again.  The Demigod formerly known as Tim Tebow, plus some defensive miscues, play calling ineptitude, and key players on defense missing from the other team.

Why the Patriots will win:

The good-haired god that has been leading the potent Patriots offense behind its terrific tight-ends, Tom Brady.  He is so dreamy he makes me want to use alliteration in telling his triumphs; he is like a mythological being.  This victory would probably not go among his best as it is against a team that is one win above .500, lets be real about the Broncos.

Pick:  Broncos (but Pats win).

Houston at Baltimore (-7.5)

Why the Ravens will win:

Ray Rice, Terrell Suggs, Ray Lewis, Naloti Ngata, Anquan Boldin, Ed Reed, Vonta Leach, Torrey Smith, Ed Dickson, Bryant McKinnie, Ben Grubbs, Matt Birk, Marshal Yanda, Michael Oher, Terrence Cody, Cory Redding, Jameel McClain, Jarret Johnson, Lardarius Webb, Bernard Pollard, Cary Williams.

Why the Texans will win:

Joe Flacco.

Pick:  Texans (but Ravens win).

New York (N) at Green Bay (-7.5)

Why the Giants will win:

We have seen it time and time again:  teams take a week off and then they have a first-round bye, and then they can’t knock the rust off fast enough.  We have seen the Giants do this before, get on a hot streak and look unstoppable.  The Giants love the fact that the NFL Playoffs are run like March Madness and not like the BCS, I am just in the mood for March Madness today.

Why the Packers will win:

On a truly serious and somber note, the death of Michael Philbin, son of Packers’ offensive coordinator Joe Philbin, is just the kind of thing that can give these players an emotional edge and allow them to realize a bigger reason to play for.  It is cane be just the thing to knock off the rust from a hiatus before the game begins.  My thoughts and prayers are with the Philbin family and the extremely close Packer community.

Pick:  Giants (but Packers win).

NFL Wild Card Round Handicapper

Bengals at Texans (-3)

Why the Bengals will win:

Home field advantage is vital in the playoffs and Reliant Stadium will be filled with Bengals fans because the only football professional football team that exists in the minds of Texas residents Romo-ed right out of the playoffs.  Seriously, the Texans have been the better team in Texas for the past two seasons and yet it is the pathetic Cowboys that get all the coverage, they haven’t done ANYTHING in the past 15 years but be the most overrated team in sports.

Why the Texans will win:

You could try and analyze this with some sort of depth, such as the Texans have an excellent running game to fall back on, or Andy Dalton has been ill and will not have a full week to prepare.  Or you could just realize that they are playing the Bengals…in the playoffs.

Pick:  Texans.

Detroit at New Orleans (-10.5)

Why the Lions will win:

Last year the Saints were ousted from the playoffs by the crotch-grabbing Marshawn Lynch and his rag tag group of Seahawks teammates.  This Lions team has Calvin Johnson who takes beast-mode to a whole new level.

Why the Saints will win:

Is that even a question?  The Saints can drop points faster than the Lions dropped games when they went 0-16 just a few seasons ago.  Drew Brees has as many weapons at receiver as the Lions have failed draft picks at receiver.

Pick:  Lions (but the Saints still win).

Atlanta at New York (N) (-3)

Why the Falcons will win:

The Falcons don’t need to play good defense, they just need to be adequate because Kevin Gilbride can’t run a good offense for the Giants, he isn’t even adequate.  Seriously, let Eli Manning be more like big brother and basically call his own offense because Gilbride is a moron.

Why the Giants will win:

The Giants have been here before and have veterans throughout the roster who know how to win in January.  Also, the gladiators that they have up front might actually start just killing people, because that is the next step for them.  I think that they should all agree to wear the terrifying facemask/visor combination that Chris Canty (the scrub of the bunch) wears.

Pick:  Falcons (and to win).

Pittsburgh at Denver (+8.5)

Why the Steelers will win:

The former Demigod known as Tim Tebow.

Why the Broncos will win:

The Demigod formerly known as Tim Tebow.

Pick:  Steelers.

Changes Required in College Athletics: Pay for Play and Don’t Be Fine With Title IX.

Ladies and Gentlemen:

I write to you today an extremely happy man.  Not because I have turned over a new leaf in 2012 (I am still the same sports curmudgeon that I have always been), and not because Christmas yielded me many gifts.  I am happy because this past week’s The New York Magazine gave everyone the most comprehensive and strongest argument for the payment of the young men playing football and basketball in college.

Look it up.

If you read anything this week, anything at all; read Let’s Start Paying College Athletes in the January 1, 2012 edition of The New York Times Magazine by Joe Nocera.  It’s great.

Nocera puts in bold print through out the short 4 page article the numbers that everyone should be made aware of.

The fact that the 15 colleges that have the highest paid football coaches, the same colleges that “can’t afford” to pay athletes a small amount are paying their football coaches a combined $53.4 million.

The fact that Rick Pitino was paid $5 million as the head coach of the Boston Celtics, and this year he will make $7.5 million as the head coach of the Louisville Cardinals (oh, and Doc Rivers is making $5.5 million as the head coach of the Celtics this year, so its not market inflation).

The fact that the University of Texas awarded its football players a very wonderful $3.1 million in scholarships, but also showered head coach Mack Brown with a ridiculous $5.1 million of salary.

The fact that television revenues for the entire, six-month NBA season total $930 million, and revenue for the entire, 3-week NCAA March Madness tournament total $770 million.

It is time to recognize that men’s college basketball and football are big business and that the veil of amateurism needs to shed.  Nocera made an argument that lays out steps that not only allows, but encourages young men to be actual student-athletes, not just athletes.

The strongest part of Nocera’s concept aside from the 6-year scholarship that must be offered to all athletes, is the notion that you only pay the athletes of the men’s basketball and football teams.

This brings me to a notion that Nocera does not entertain, but one that I believe should be addressed.  I believe it is time to either heavily amend or do away with Title IX.

Title IX is the rule in the NCAA that requires that schools have varsity athletic participation “substantially proportionate” to the undergraduate enrollment.  That is:  if a school is 50% men and 50% women, then its varsity athletes should be 50% men and 50% women.

Now, before you write me off as a misogynistic blowhard, please hear me out.  This rule was implemented with the purpose of giving women equal footing in the world of higher education by giving them equal chances at financial assistance that would allow many people otherwise unable to afford college, a chance to afford it.

Alright so here goes my argument.  First, there is no doubt, as can be seen in the continually increasing cost of tuition at colleges and universities, that the cost of offering higher education to all students (regardless of if they are a varsity athlete or not) is extremely high and going up.  Now that being said, a lot of schools choose to fund athletic programs.  Very few of these programs actually make money for the university and unquestionably two of the sports that have the best chance to make money are men’s basketball and men’s football.

The 2010-2011 season saw the Texas A&M women’s basketball team, the #7 team IN THE COUNTRY, operate at a loss of $2.8 million dollars.  $2.8 million dollars in the red.  Revenues from the Texas A&M football program that year? $41.9 million. $41.9 million.  So the women’s basketball is taking $2.8 million away from the University that could be going to students who otherwise could not afford a higher education.  Is that what Title IX was intended to do?

If schools can make money and thus have more money available for scholarships to men and women alike, then they should do it.  Colleges and universities are supposed to be places of higher education, NOT sports leagues.  Are sports a wonderful part of the atmosphere of colleges and universities? Yes.  They are also wonderful, however, at the intramural level (and much less expensive to operate).

How many more scholarships were offered and how much lower is the tuition at the University of Texas because of the $93.9 million dollars in football revenue in the 2010 season alone?  We may never know; it would take the school doing away with their football program.

There is another reason that Title IX has run its course and is no longer in touch with the times.  The number of women receiving undergraduate and post-graduate degrees is greater than men in the United States of America.  Title IX is no longer necessary to allow for the equal opportunity of women, instead the money that is made by men’s sports is needed to invest in strengthening the academic endeavors of young men and the number young men who strive for academic achievement, and not on money hemorrhaging ventures of women’s sports that are required by an out-of-date law.

Everyone should go and read Joe Nocera’s article Let’s Start Playing College Athletes in the most recent edition of The New York Times Magazine.  I hope that you will be able to read it with an open mind.  I also hope, but I know that it will be very difficult, that you consider my idea that Title IX has run its course as an effective law that has a positive impact on those affected.  There is no doubt that college sports will continue, and there is also no doubt that there must be changes to how they continue.