So, we're counting down to kickoff, and the inevitability of 18-0. It's not an inevitability that I particularly enjoy, but one that I have come to accept. I am tired of convincing myself that there are any one of a number of vulnerabilities on this Patriot team that any one of a number of opponents could exploit in any one of a number of ways.

It doesn't matter how slow and decrepit the Patriot linebacking unit is. It doesn't matter how dirty Rodney Harrison plays this week. It doesn't even matter that I don't think Laurence Maroney is a legitimate big time tailback in today's NFL. All that really matters is that Quentin Jammer, Antonio Cromartie, Marlon McCree, Clinton Hart and Eric Weddle have a better chance of being elected Pope than they do of containing Moss and Welker this week. And even if they could contain those two, what of Ben Watson, Stallworth and Kevin Faulk (who has been coming up big in situations where I didn't want him to come up big since he was at LSU under Gerry DiNardo's reign of terror)?

Yes, the Chargers managed to lead the NFL in takeaways this season. They also managed to beat Indianapolis twice this season, even winning in the RCA Dome last week. But they also suffered humiliating losses to the Patriots and the very, very, very average Minnesota Vikings this season. Playing on the road and in the cold in New England against the undefeated team that every one loves to hate, it's just not happening. I only hope LaDanian Tomlinson manages to be as entertaining with this year's round of postgame whining as he was last year.

Since this blog is supposed to be about the Red Sox, I would be remiss if I didn't pass along Mike Lowell's statesman-like response to potential testing for HGH in baseball. Mike Lowell is willing to take the test, provided that it's 100% accurate, but he's out if the test is only 99% accurate. I can't help but wonder if there's any room for negotiation there, since it seems very unlikely that any test for any substance will ever be 100% accurate.

Lowell also brought up the double standard issue. Baseball players, writers, coaches and so forth have been quick to point out the fact that Shawne Merriman was suspended for four games and still went to the Pro Bowl last year, and Rodney Harrison missed the first four games of this season for being implicated in an HGH scandal. But it is baseball that is in the cross hairs.

It's simple, as Lowell himself conceded in that article. Baseball looked the other way for a long time, refusing any kind of testing. The NFL, on the other hand, has had a ban on steroids for years. It might not be perfect, but at least football players have been suspended for violating the NFL ban on performance enhancers for years.

Mark McGwire admitted he took andro in 1998, when it was not banned according to the rules of Major League Baseball. It was, however, a banned substance in the NFL at the time. Roger Clemens is alleged to have taken steroids in years when none of the substances Brian McNamee and George Mitchell accuse him of taking were even banned in baseball. Baseball didn't even start testing or developing any kind of comprehensive policy until Congress got on their case.

I don't think there is a double standard here. Rodney Harrison and Shawne Merriman lost a quarter of the season and four game checks. Four games doesn't seem like much at first, but when you do the math it is the equivalent of 40 and a half baseball games. Considering the NFL developed and implemented this policy on their own, long before baseball got religion thanks to a Congressional hearing, I think it's more than reasonable.

I do think Merriman shouldn't have gone to the Pro Bowl, but I wasn't one of the people who voted for him. I think out of common decency, he should have declined the invite, but that's his business. It is, or at least it was, a free country. If people are dumb enough to vote to send a cheater to the Pro Bowl, that's their misfortune.

In other news, in my ongoing effort to make this blog more interactive, here's another gem of a comment from an anonymous reader. In a recent post I happened to bid the Seattle Seahawks a less than fond farewell from the 2007 season. As a part of it, I ripped Seahawk fans for ripping off traditions from Texas A & M and suggested they should play a song to commemorate every early exit from the playoffs the way A & M plays Taps across campus when an alumnus (or alumna) dies in the line of duty serving in the Armed Services.

I suggested "Follow the Yellow Brick Road" as Seattle stole the nickname Emerald City from the Wizard of Oz (Not very funny, but then I just might have overindulged with respect to beer at the time). Reader KobraKommander (in one of his rare instances of bringing things to the table) improved the suggestion with one of his own, offering "Goodbye Yellow Brick Road," which is pretty funny.

To make a very long, and pretty unnecessary story short, the anonymous commenter suggested "I'm an @#$hole" by Denis Leary. I bring it up because this is a bit ambiguous. I assume the commenter meant that I, the blogger, am the @#$hole. But it is open to the suggestion that the commenter himself could be the @#$hole. Or any Seahawk fans who might play that to bid their team adieu from the playoffs could be the @#$hole. And let's face it, the odds are that if you live in Seattle or root for the Seahawks, you probably are an @#$hole.

The other day, I got a snide little email from a friend of mine who just happens to be a big Patriots fan. At the best of times, it can be particularly difficult to be friendly with Patriots fans but being from New England, and all, it's also very difficult to find normal friends who watch sports and aren't fans of the local teams to befriend. This year, however, it has been particularly difficult.

My friend wondered how I felt when I saw TO crying at the end of the Dallas debacle this weekend. I told my friend the truth, I said I generally have no problem with a person expressing their genuine, honest emotional response to a given situation provided, of course, that I happen to like the person in question.

I didn't mind TO crying at the end of the game. It had to be incredibly frustrating to see Dallas waste an entire season by playing a second half without any semblance of urgency. Even in the two minute offense, it seemed like they either counted the game-winning TD they never actually scored as already on the board or they just assumed the Giants would realize that Dallas was much better and would simply forfeit.

I thought Dallas didn't make a concerted effort to get TO the ball in the second half. I thought Dallas seemed to assume that the Giants wouldn't make any adjustments in their pass rush and coverages. I thought Dallas assumed they could simply run the same plays that worked in the first half because the Giants couldn't or wouldn't change their game plan. And with Tom Coughlin on the other side, it might have looked like a safe bet. But I got the sense that Dallas didn't approach the second half of the biggest game of the year with a unified vision to win the game. And I don't know whose fault that was, but I doubt that it was TO's.

It could be worse, right? After all, it's not as though TO became embroiled in a strange personal scandal in the week leading up to the biggest game of the year. I don't know what the truth is, in this situation, if there is any truth on any side of this strange story. I am inclined to think that there have to be a few simpler ways of extorting $100,000 from a guy than this restraining order con.

I am upset by this whole stupid little mess. Why did it come out now? What is the point of wasting what might be a perfectly good distraction on a week where the Chargers couldn't beat the Patriots if they got to put 15 of their best "men" on the field against the regulation 11 from the other side? It just sets up so well, to have the team with the revenge angle from the grace and dignity the Patriots displayed beating San Diego on the road last postseason coming to Foxboro to play the team with the unblemished record in all but the moral dimension of the game.

Of course, just about every thing that looks so well scripted is bound to unravel spectacularly in reality. Especially if Philip Rivers can play this week. I'd feel more comfortable with Billy Volek under center. You know Rivers is due for an dismal performance of epic proportions, especially with Eli Manning still playing and the inevitable comparisons between the two of them. Plus, LaDanian Tomlinson is a great player when the breaks aren't beating the Bolts, but who whines better when the breaks go the other way?

And finally, the Chargers deserve to lose. For all they cried about how classless the Patriots were last season, and with some measure of good reason, you'd think they might have emerged from the upset in Indianapolis with some measure of dignity. Alas, that wasn't the case. Not since Emmett Smith walked the Earth in the first half of the 1990s have I seen such a shameless display of helmet removal as I saw when the Chargers defense stopped Indy on fourth and goal in the late fourth quarter.

And it's a damn shame. 17-1 might not sound quite as good as 16-1 would have, but I could have found the strength to live with it.

It's finally happened. I suppose it was a matter of time, but I doubt any one expected it to come so suddenly. After decades of mocking kings, popes, God Almighty and any one and every one under the sun, the Onion has finally brought ruin down on itself. Where will we go to find out what larks Area Man and Area Woman have gotten themselves into this week. A legion of Patriots fans is now gathering. In about three years, after they learn basic navigation and develop opposable thumbs, the Onion is done like dinner.

For those who have not seen the slander most vile, here it is. The very idea that Bill Belichick could muddle his way through any question on any subject is anathema to a New Englander. We know that if this great coach and archdouche doesn't have a home-made particle accelerator somewhere on his fortified residential compound, it's because he lacks the time rather than a working knowledge of advanced multidisciplinary physics. That, and I'm reasonably sure the presence of a particle accelerator on the grounds of the Patriots team facilities would attract a certain amount of interest from several government agencies.

It's bad enough that LaDainian Tomlinson can get away with casting aspersions on the great Belichick. But when the NFL, the US government and all right thinking Americans tolerate a media outlet of questionable repute slandering the man who single-handedly saved the National Football League, I just don't think I can find the strength to go on. Belichick did save the NFL, just ask a Patriots fan. That conversation might get a little murky when you point out that the NFL hasn't faced a grave threat since 1987, but a command of current events and the ability to bring the powers of rational thought to bear on said events have never been the hallmarks of the New England sports fan.

That said, the article itself was a little disappointing. It wasn't very funny, in the first place. I felt they tried too hard to work in the economic angle, any question on any other subject would probably have been more amusing. That's the trouble with satire as a genre, when it's good it's great and when it's even average it's stale and disappointing. But, since I went 2 for 2 last week, I'm feeling arrogant enough to predict these games.

The past record doesn't mean very much when it comes time to lace up the spikes on game day. Neither Manning's long run of failure against the Patriots, nor his recent string of victories in Foxboro will have the impact that the media is giving them right now. As for my feeling, I want both teams to lose. Since that it impossible, I have to weigh my hatred of the Pats against my hatred of Peyton Manning. I simply do not want to live in a world where Peyton Manning is a champion. After all, I pronounced him an archfraud in this space in September. So I'm going with the Patriots.

Then there is this piece I discovered on Slate. If you are wondering why Slate pays people to write about football, or like me you wonder why Slate pays the people it pays to write about football, this will justify your sentiments. First of all, this tool runs down the idea of seeing a playoff game live. I've never seen an NFL playoff game in person, but I think it would easily be the most amazing experience of my life.

The game I saw at Gillette Stadium this season was fantastic. The playoff game which featured the largest single comeback in NBA postseason history (Celtics vs. Nets, 2001) was unbelievable. The overtime playoff loss to the New Jersey Devils (1994) I saw at the real Garden was awesome. I imagine an NFL playoff game would be like all of that combined and then some. I imagine it would rank right behind Springsteen's concert as the most amazing spectacle I've ever seen.

Atmosphere isn't overrated. Sitting in front of your TV, even if it is HD, is overrated. But even worse, this person referred to Shaun Alexander as Gimpy McHalfspeed in an article for which he was paid (in the interest of fairness, I must confess I didn't click that link to find out if it were an original or borrowed name. I was simply too depressed). Would that I were a douche with a prepackaged sense of humor, then I too could be paid for poor writing (and I am aware of the irony inherent in my criticizing another writer when this isn't exactly Charles Dickens).

Then there is this other participant in Slate's dialog on the NFL playoffs. Quick aside: Good call on the dialog format, Slate editors. After all, Plato is still jumping off the shelves these days for other reasons than the simple fact that educators will insist on force-feeding him to generations of people that really don't need it (far be it for me to discount the wisdom of the ancients, I just don't see the brilliance of the Republic, a work which continually runs down Athenian democracy while admitting that the work could not have been composed under any other system). I just don't like Plato, but now isn't the time for philosophy.

According to our commentator, weather will not be as big a factor as predicted. After all, most of the Bears players do not come from Chicago originally. But the Bears do have more recent experience at managing cold weather than the Saints do. Living on the Great Lakes, which tend to be a degree or two chillier than the Gulf Coast, and playing in Soldier Field (which is outdoors, and as such slightly cooler and a bit more windy than your average dome) might give them a slight edge over a team which comes from 1,000 miles to the South and is still practicing indoors.

In the end, I think the weather will give the Bears a slight edge, but one that will matter very little if they can't keep Deuce McAllister in check. I think the Bears will win the game. I see NO as somewhat better on offense than Seatlle and not quite as good on defense. As long as Rex doesn't make stupid mistakes, I think we're looking at a rematch.

In the Super Bowl, I see Kraft and Belichick using the two week layoff to pressure Dolphins management into converting the field format in another sad psychological ploy.

This weekend has given us all a lot to think about as the playoffs come to an end. I think the Verve said it best when they sang: "It's a bittersweet symphony, that's life." Unfortunately it turned out to be a very bittersweet symphony for the Verve when it turned out that they had sampled a symphonic version of "You Can't Always Get What You Want" by the Rolling Stones. That's a little bit ironic, when you lose the rights to your breakout song, it gets used in a Nike commercial even though your band was rabidly opposed to corporations. It's just a bittersweet symphony of not getting what you want. But anyway...

First and foremost, I spent today riveted to ESPN News awaiting the firestorm of consequences to catch up with LaDainian Tomlinson for impugning the class of the New England Patriots and their wily supergenius of a head coach. The blogosphere has been burning LT for his "sour grapes" attitude. But the mainstream media has yet to call for his deportation, deactivation or any other punishment that would fit his heinous crime.

The nerve of some people. It's not as if Bill Belichick has been mentioned as a home wrecker in divorce proceedings in New Jersey, after all. Oh wait, I'm sorry. He has. Plus he looks like an unmade bed on the sidelines and has a long track record of being a total douche. Let's not forget that he gave Magini the silent treatment (a gesture so immature that even I, the least mature person my age I know, think it's immature) for bailing out to coach the Jets when he pulled the same move in abandoning the Jets to coach the Pats. And of course there was the shove he gave a photographer, which I didn't really care about because it was kind of funny.

I don't have a problem with what LT said. In part, it's because I don't like the Patriots. Actually, I'm starting to hate the Patriots nearly as much as I hate the Danny Ainge Celtics, but that's a story for another day. Also, I don't think a guy who submitted a first rate offensive performance can be considered a whiner. It's not his fault that Shawmne Merriman has a foolish dance and a strange sense of timing. LaDainian Tomlinson did every thing he could to help his team win, he just needed a bit more help than he got.

I am the guy who got mad at the Michigan State players who got into an altercation with players from Illinois who were celebrating their first win in Spartan Stadium since 1994 at the fifty yard line. I also criticized the New York Giants and their fans when they complained that Mario Williams and David Carr dared imitate the "ballin'" jump shot celebration. Believe it or not, there is a difference as far as I'm concerned.

LaDainian Tomlinson played a great game, he could not have done more to defend his turf and his team's honor. The Giants and Spartans cannot make the same claim. Neither can Shaun Phillips who made the same sort of comment as LT today. Maybe it's hard to have a consistent reaction as a fan because the athletes and situations involved change so much over the course of a season and a career.

I have not been a big LT fan up till now. He's a great talent, he certainly deserves all the praise he has gotten to this point in his career based upon his numbers. He was the best player in the NFL this year, and, unlike some other MVPs in recent memory, he did not submit a disappointing individual effort in his lone playoff game.

More than anything else, I think LaDainian Tomlinson's comments did not bother me because it was his honest emotional reaction to a heartbreaking defeat. As Mike Holmgren said following the loss in Chicago, everything a player or coach has done over the last eight months was building to the one moment when a playoff game can be won or lost. And all of a sudden, it's over. And for the Chargers it was a shockingly abrupt and baffling ending. Every thing that could have gone wrong in the fourth quarter seemd to go wrong. A game that they dominated in the murky recesses of statistics went tragically wrong in the material sphere.

In all of that, frustrated, hurt and confused, LaDainian came right out and said what he felt. He was mad as hell, and he wasn't going to take it any more. Like Faith Hill's reaction after finding out that Carrie Underwood was female artist of the year at this past fall's Country Music Awards, LT's tirade shocked a lot of people who only knew him as the mild mannered back who scored a league record 31 TDs and never even spiked the ball. But the minute he said anything negative about the single most impressive dynasty of the last 5 years and the greatest coach of all time, then he was a selfish crybaby.

In case you care, I didn't have a problem with Faith Hill's negative reaction to the award going to Carrie Underwood. It seems every single person in America is so image conscious that they are terrified of showing any genuine emotional reaction to a disappointment. I am tired of good losers. You show me a good loser, and I'll show you a loser as the saying goes.

That said, I don't want to see more Peyton Mannings, either. Last year it was the protection, earlier this season it was the defense. Who knows who will be responsible this time around should the Colts fall victim to the Patriots? It surely can't be the quarterback. That much is clear. I only wonder if the fans in Indianapolis will be yelling "movers" should the breaks start beating the boys in Indy this weekend.

If you are a somewhat less than gracious loser once in a while, but you don't point the finger at people on your own side (unless you're TO), that's fine. If you keep going there, then you're Peyton Manning. After three or four centuries of going there, then you're French. The real tragedy of the Chargers falling this week is that I now must root for the Patriots this week. And after that, who knows? I guess there's always the NFC Champions. I want the Bears to win, since I held the bandwagon together in spite of some long odds and shoddy play from Rex Grossman. But I can live with the Saints far more easily than I could with the balding metrosexual and his mentor in the hack-a-hoodie. God forbid it be the Colts.

Earlier this evening, it looked like there wasn't going to be a post tonight. There was a big upset brewing in the top 25. It looked like an unranked Michigan St. team was going to blow out the Fighting Irish. It also looked like the BC Eagles were going to cement their status as best of the rest in the Atlantic Coast Conference. But funny things happen sometimes in football.

Notre Dame scored 19 unanswered points in the fourth quarter on 3 TDs in a 5:25 span. For those who wrote off Charlie Weis after last week's debacle, it might be time to back off a bit. The team looked shaky (to say the least) in the first quarter. Weis looked fairly foolish when his call to go for it on 4th and 8 just past midfield backfired and Michigan State scored a big TD. Of course, there is also John L. Smith, the man, the myth, legend.

How many times in college and professional football do we see a coach take the air out of the ball when they get a big lead in the second half? I can see some of the logic, not wanting to risk the big turnover. And Michigan State was killing Notre Dame on the ground for the first three quarters, especially with Jehuu Caulcrick, the big 260 pound tailback. Thank God John L. Smith went to the power running formation and stopped running out of the spread formation, which has killed Notre Dame since Joe Tiller brought that attack to Purdue in 1997.

And then there was BC. A blocked extra point helped them beat Clemson, now a missed extra point cost them this game against NC State. Once you miss a kick, you chase that point all day. Then you have to go for two when you want to make it a seven point game. If you miss the two, then it goes from a TD to tie, to a loss situation. Damn shame it had to happen like that.

Of course, there is the theory that you have to take care of business when you have the chance. BC had the ball on third down with short yardage to go. They fumble the quarterback-center exchange, but they were lucky. Matt Ryan fell on the ball, and they only wasted one down. It set the stage perfectly for the most overhyped short yardage specialist in recent memory. I imagine that the CHB had an easy story, and angle all set up. Alas, NC State did not get the memo, and they stopped Brian Toal for a loss on fourth down. That set up their winning TD drive. Under a minute to go, and no time outs. But they took care of business. Good times.

One thing that drove me crazy during the Notre Dame game was the constant game breaks from the studio. I can understand when they have news or scores to update. I appreciate finding out what's going on in games I'm not watching, especially when I can't check the score during a commercial because a particular game isn't on in the area. But if they updated me on the Ohio State game one more time 3 hours after it ended, I was going to start hopping up and down and hooting like Woody Woodpecker.

On a totally unrelated note, what is the point of the Nike Gridiron/Briscoe High spots? I can see where it is somewhat cool to envision a high school where Jimmy Johnson teaches history and Brian Urlacher, LaDanian Tomlinson, Michael Vick and Matt Leinart play football under George Seifert. It's also funny to see Urlacher and the other captains tower over their rivals in the big game. I'm guessing that the point is that with Nike equipment anyone can play with the big boys, unless that Ryan kid is somebody I should know but can't place.

I think the real point is one of those beautiful accidental moments that occur in commercials. A classic example is the Michael Strahan Chunky Soup ad from about 6 or 7 years ago, where he's handing out soup to commuters on the New York subway. As the ad ends, there is a shot where his head is framed by one of the windows in the sliding door. Right below his big goofy smile is a sign that says: "Mind the gap." There is no way that was deliberate, but it's still funny.

To make a long story short, the moment like that from the Briscoe High ad is the unintentional referendum on Michael Vick as quarterback. With a fourth down and time for one play, what does George Seifert run? A tailback option pass play, which is almost assured to fail in that situation because it is the run threat that leaves the wide receiver open down field. On fourth and long there is no way you'd ever run with time about to expire. You'd think the quarterback should be dropping back to throw it deep. But when your passing threat is Michael Vick, maybe you do want Tomlinson throwing the do or die pass.

I hate Michael Vick because he tried to kill my fantasy team a couple of years ago. I also hate him because he is a big whiner. Every time the Falcons fall short, it's a coaching failure, never the QB. Then there was his unilateral demand that media stop questioning his pocket passing ability in the wake of the single most impressive passing performance of the modern era when he threw for 250 yards against the Dolphins last season.