Week 6 Postmortem: Alcoa Presents "Fantastic Finishes" & Dead Nolan Walking

When I was growing up in the 80's, one of things I most looked forward to on Sundays in the Fall and Winter -- besides the Niners kicking the shit out of whoever was unlucky enough to be playing them that day, of course -- was a feature which ran exclusively during the later (1 pm Pacific) AFC games on NBC. While I usually wasn't all that into whatever game they were airing -- usually an AFC duel -- I knew that at some point in the 4th quarter they would cut to commercial and I'd hear the legendary Harry Kalas (although, for the record, I prefer my Kalas shaved) utter those four magic words: "Alcoa Presents... 'FANtastic Finishes'." This would be followed by highlights of some unbelievable ending to a game from a few years earlier. It was like history class for sports nerds like myself, and I made sure I never missed it.

(I'd love to embed a video here to enlighten those who were too young to enjoy "Fantastic Finishes", and for nostalgia purposes for those who do remember, but a Google video search actually comes up empty. Sure, there are a few mentions around the web, but no videos?! How could you desert me now, when I need you most, YouTube?! I thought you cared about me.)

So, why do I mention this now, you ask? Because there were a bunch of great finishes in the NFL this weekend, you jackass! In fact, there was a record five (5) games this weekend decided by a score in the final 10 seconds of the game. Two of these involved upsets of high-and-mighty NFC East teams. And with the Giants getting upset in Cleveland on Monday Night, the most powerful and hyped of all the divisions were swept! Wait, they weren't? The Eagles won? But they were down 9 in the 4th quarter on the road! How the hell did this happen?!

Glad you asked, imaginary reader.

Mike Nolan happened. He always does, doesn't he Niner fans? Yes, the king of bad clock management, questionable 4th down decisions, and unbelievably bad replay challenges was at it again on Sunday. This time, however, he decided to concentrate his entire focus on blowing the game solely through use of the replay system. In fact, he pulled off a kind of triple crown of bad replay usage -- the non-review of an obvious bad call, a review of an obvious good call, and (in it's NFL debut) a replay of a missed field goal, which wasn't even actually reviewable (not that it stopped him from throwing away a challenge, mind you). Let's start at the top:

THE BAD CALL

The Niners led 3-0 as the Eagles drove the ball into their territory. On a 3rd and 3, the Niners had a chance to hold Philly to a FG with a stop before Donovan McNabb hit Hank Baskett (who, by the way, is reportedly engaged to Kendra Wilkinson of "Girls Next Door" fame -- but can't go public or risk losing her part on the show) for a first down. Only a quick replay by FOX clearly showed the ball came loose when Baskett hit the ground and should've been ruled "no catch".

FOX analyst Brian "Bent Pinky" Baldinger correctly said that Nolan should challenge the call. Then FOX showed another replay, making the case for a challenge even more obvious. Still, no red flag from Nolan. Baldinger continued to insist the Niners had to challenge the call as McNabb led his team up to the line so slowly, I could've sworn it was the end of Super Bowl XXXIX, and Donovan was getting ready to blow chucks. But Nolan never challenged, the play counted, and the Eagles scored an important TD on the drive.

According to Matt Maiocco, 15 seconds passed from the showing of the replay on TV, and the next snap, yet Nolan contended not only that he "didn't have time" to throw the flag (he says he found out it wasn't catch after the next snap), but that his system for evaluating replay challenges works just fine. Sorry, Mike, but at least one of those statements is false.

THE GOOD CALL

Having realized he screwed up the previous play by not challenging, Nolan next did what he always seems to -- overcompensates by taking the next available opportunity to do what he should've done earlier -- even if it's not a good time. Nolan has made a habit of knee-jerk reactions like this ("What, you think I don't go for it on 4th down enough? Okay, fine, I'll go for it on the next one no matter how inappropriate it is under those specific game conditions"). So the next time a semi-questionable play occurred, out came the hanky. Only this time, it was on a clearly good catch by DeSean Jackson along the sidelines. Jackson not only got two feet down, it may have even been three.

So why the challenge? Nolan claimed he "wanted to see if he (Jackson) was bobbling the ball before he went out. Not that he was bobbling according to the replay (the only thing that matters since that's the criteria by which the play is reviewed), not even that he thought he was bobbling, juts that he "wanted to see" if he was bobbling the ball. Gee Mike, we're all curious about it, but is it really worth a timeout just to satisfy your curiosity? As Gwen Knapp of the Chronicle pointed out in her column on the game, replays are for sure things, not wild guesses -- especially ones in the 1st half, since wrong ones automatically coast you the bonus 3rd challenge you may need late in the game.

THE... WAIT, WHAT? REALLY?

So, down to one challenge, his timeouts dwindling, and behind in the game, Nolan decided to make history with his final challenge. Not only would he waste it on a good call -- a call that had no chance of being over-turned -- he actually wasted it on a call which was not eligible to be challenged. He challenged a made field goal which, while it did appear may have missed, only put his team down by 7 points with plenty of time left. His team was still in it, they needed their timeouts (especially since they waste so many -- and they quickly did just that, wasting their last one), might've needed that last challenge (they almost did), and the call in question was made by an official who had a better angle on the play than any replay did.

Nolan tried his best to slough this off on any number of other reasons -- he shouldn't have been allowed to challenge (this is kind of like the drunk driver blaming the bartender for not taking his keys), there should be a sign to give coaches whether kicks are low enough (below the uprights) to be challenged, there should be better TV angles on kicks to make it easier to challenge, and he's still not sure the call was right. Never mind the fact that he's clearly not sure about the challenge rules, never mind the fact he didn't mention any of these loopholes when the new challenge rules were instated during the off-season, never mind the shifting of blame, this was an indefensible move based solely on the game situation.

In short, Mike Nolan is the worst challenger since the space shuttle. What? Too soon?

So, what does Nolan say about all this in the press conference? The typical coach speak about having to get better ("And that includes the coaching staff") cliches? Nope. The "Pin this one on me, I lost this game" bravado that might win him some fans in the locker room? No siree. At least a token "We'll have to look into our challenge system" BS. Nuh-uh. Just more patented Nolan Denial. Why not, that's what he does best.

I've said it before and I'll say it again -- the Niners cannot become a good team until they have a good head coach. That man is not named Mike Nolan.

Hollywood Horror Show: Cockblocked by Cartman

This is a series detailing the strange, sometimes traumatic run-ins I've had with celebrities since I moved to LA 11 years ago. The previous installment, featuring crowd-favorite Richard Simmons, can be found here.

I’m less than a couple of weeks into this, and I’m already re-posting my second piece from another blog. I don’t feel as bad about this one -- because it’s more due to being incredibly into what I’m working on right now (a very good thing), and busy with “real” work (not so good) –- but it’s still pretty cheesey.

But I wanted to get something up today, and I’ve got a great post coming tomorrow (an NFL wrap-up, complete with copious bashing of Mike Nolan), so until then I can live with re-posting another great only-in-LA story. This one, however, displays a dark side of celebrity I never really knew existed:

A few years ago, I spent New Years Eve with Matt Stone and Trey Parker, the creators of 'South Park' -- I believe it was 1998/99. My good friend and writing partner at the time, Phil, used to write for the show, and stayed close with the guys, so they invited him to party with them at this club for the night and I tagged along. But not long after I sat down at their reserved table, I was pulled aside by this friend of theirs (I can't remember his name, but I'll call him "Joe"). He introduced himself as a friend of Matt and Trey's from Colorado and asked who I was and what I was doing at their table. I explained that I was Phil's friend, and Joe said that was cool, apologized for the 3rd degree, and explained that because the guys were famous they had to be careful of hangers-on and it was his job to "police the scene".

After that, everything was cool for awhile. We all got pretty hammered, the guys buying lots and lots of drinks and being very funny. I started to talk to this really sexy girl who was there, and although I was quite drunk, I got the feeling she was very interested. We talked and flirted for what must've been over an hour. Everything was going great and I thought I was definitely getting laid that night. Only when I go to the bathroom, my buddy Phil approaches me and tells me Joe asked him to deliver a message: the girl was not interested in me, was getting creeped out by my constant attention, and had asked Joe to get me to leave her alone.

I was completely shocked and embarrassed, but I figured I must've been much more drunk than I thought and was badly misreading her signals. Needless to say, I steered clear of her. But she kept coming back up to me, chatting playfully, obviously flirting. When I was distant, she asked what was wrong like she didn't know. Was this girl screwing with my head? I was really confused. That is, until I saw Trey glaring over at me every time I was anywhere near her. Then I realized that every time the girl wasn't at my side, Trey was all over her, trying to chat her up, buying her shots, etc. Finally, I confronted Phil about it, and he admitted that not only was this Joe guy there to keep hangers-on out of the guys' way, but quite possibly to recruit girls for them, and in my case, keep unwanted competition on the sidelines.

As I've now learned over the years, this is a common practice among male celebs -- having a friend tag along when they go out to act as bodyguard/pimp. Pretty sleazy, but that's Hollywood.

UPDATE: I forgot one interesting detail. Later in the night, the whole group was invited back to Trey's place in the Hollywood Hills, where we continued to party (and where I eventually passed out on the couch). There, Trey produced what I found to be the highlight of the evening -- his Cartman Bong. It had a ceramic statuette of Cartman as its base -- the glass tube springing out from the wool cap on his head, and his arm extending up to form the stem (with the bowl in his hand).

Theoretical Gambling: Week 6

It’s Friday night, and everyone knows what that means -- it's time for another weekend of fake gambling! And, after a winning record last week, I have even more make-believe money with which to wager. That's right, had I been in Vegas last weekend, I would've left with more money than I came with -- not including hotel, buffet, and hooker expenses. Let’s take a look at the numbers:

Week 5 record: 8-6
Week 5 vs. The Spread: 7-7
Money won/lost: +$800
Season total (gain/loss): $5,800 (+$800)

Time for this week’s picks, Daddy needs a new pair of imaginary shoes...

SAINTS (-7) over Raiders

The Saints have lost some real heartbreakers this year. I say this week they take out their frustration on the sideshow that is the Raiders and whoever’s acting as their figurehead coach this week.

PREDICTED SCORE: Saints 34, Raiders 16
“MONEY” WAGERED: $500

Ravens (+4.5) over COLTS

The Colts are really lucky to be 2-2. I think they make it to 3-2, but not easily.

PREDICTION: Indy 24, Ravens 20
WAGER: $200

JETS (+5.5) over Bengals

No Carson Palmer, no points.

PREDICTION: Jets 30, Bengals 10
WAGER: $800

Panthers (+1.5) over BUCS 


The Panthers are “win ugly” pick this year – you’re rarely impressed, but they usually score more points than the other team. And most teams that do that win.

PREDICTION: Panthers 20, Bucs 16
WAGER: $600

FALCONS (+2.5) over Bears 


I really like the Falcons, and this week they are at home and getting points. So why do I feel so worried about this pick? Because at some point, Atlanta is bound to put up one of those “They’re still the Falcons”-type games.

PREDICTION: Falcons 17, Bears 16
WAGER: $100

Lions (+13) over VIKINGS

Adrian Petersen, a 300 yard game? It could happen. Still, I think Detroit keeps it relatively close.

PREDICTION: Vikes 30, Lions 20
WAGER: $100

TEXANS (-3) over Dolphins 


The actual Cinderella team in the AFC so far against the pre-season pick for the Cinderella team in the AFC. After last week’s debacle, the winless Texans really need a ‘W’. If only just to head off those “Houston, we have a problem” jokes at the pass.

PREDICTION: Texans 27, Dolphins 20
WAGER: $200

Jaguars (+3) over BRONCOS 


Two teams I really don’t know what to think of, but I have to pick one. So, when in doubt, go with the underdog and take the points. Especially when they’re going against a sieve of a defense.

PREDICTION: Jags 31, Broncos 28
WAGER: $200

REDSKINS (-13.5) over Rams 


The Redskins look for real. If they are, they will cover this spread easily.

PREDICTION: Skins 34, Rams 13
WAGER: $700

Eagles (-4.5) over NINERS 


No Westbrook, no problem. No way the Eagles lose three in a row. The Niners, on the other hand, lose three in a row better than any team in the league.

PREDICTION: Eagles 31, Niners 20
WAGER: $1,000

Cowboys (-5.5) over CARDINALS

The Cowboys are due to play well. Kurt Warner is due to throw like 60 times for 500 yards and 4 INTs.

PREDICTION: Cowboys 38, Cards 28
WAGER: $500

Packers (-2) over SEAHAWKS 


Are the Packers and Seahawks this bad? I’d like to think so. I just wish both teams could lose this game.
PREDICTION: Pack 27, Seahawks 24
WAGER: $300

Patriots (+6) over CHARGERS 


This should’ve been a great matchup – the rematch of last year’s AFC championship, and quite possibly a preview of this year’s. Instead, it’s a test of which AFC power has fallen further since last year.

PREDICTION: Chargers 24, Pats 21
WAGER: $600

BROWNS (+8) over Giants 


The Giants are due for a stinker, the Browns need something, anything, to keep from letting this season become a complete embarrassment.

PREDICTION: Giants 27, Browns 20
WAGER: $200

My Wife's Survivor Pick: Washington
My Wife's Record So Far: 5-0

The Way Back Machine

If you haven't been to yearbookyourself.com, you're missing out. It's a site which allows you to easily (and I mean really easily) photoshop your face onto a retro head for a classic yearbook photo. Here's a few of me, the first if I graduated high school in 1976:



Class of 1982:



Class of 1988:



Class of 1990:



Class of 1992:



Hey, I really had that last look for awhile in the 90's. In hindsight I'm surprised I didn't get punched in the face by random people more often. Or asked if I was any relation to k.d. lang.

Hollywood Horror Show: My "Meet Cute" With Richard Simmons

I've written about this before, in the early days of McCovey Chronicles, but I'm lazy, and busy, and nobody (at least nobody with a life) is reading this anyway, so why the hell not just recycle a really funny story? Of all the crazy things that have happened to me since I've been in L.A., not only is this probably the craziest, it was actually the first. Talk about anti-climactic.

The main reason I'm re-posting this is that I want to start a semi-regular series where I ramble on about some of the only-in-LA moments I've experienced here. I've been feeling a touch nostalgic about my time here because (drum roll) my wife and I have decided to move Boulder, Colorado in '09! I'm not quiting screenwriting or anything -- many screenwriters now work from all over the globe, keeping contact with the industry by phone and e-mail, and face-to-face meetings are down anyway due to scaling back of development tracing all the way back to the writer's strike -- but I have to get out of this town. Like, now. My current nostalgia is rooted mostly in the knowledge I'm finally escaping*.

But why not enjoy the nostalgia while the tide is high, right? So, without any further ado -- like there wasn't enough ado already -- here's my first-person account of what it is like to be serenaded by the one and only Richard Simmons:

The year was 1997, and I had just moved out here to L.A., hoping to make my way in the business they call "show". I moved out in late September (on Brian Johnson Day), but purposely avoided getting a job for the first month, so I could watch every agonizing inning of the Giants getting swept in the NLDS to the Marlins.

When I finally did get a job, it was as a lowly assistant at a production company, Crash Films, which made commercials and videos. These types of jobs usually allow you to wear shorts and a t-shirt -- after all, you spend half your time in your car making runs and getting people’s lunch -- but after giving me the job, my bosses asked that I wear a dress shirt and tie. While this was somewhat of a hardship for me (as dressing formally always is), there I was on the first day, dressed in my Sunday finest.

My first assignment of that Monday morning was to go to the nearby Vons supermarket to buy a bouquet of flowers for display in the office's lobby, which they shared with a photography studio next door. So I was quite the sight entering the office that day -- dapper in my pressed shirt, tie, and khakis, and holding a giant bouquet of beautiful flowers. So much the vision was I, in fact, that I caught the eye of a man standing at the entrance to the photo studio. He, too, was hard to miss, standing there in his tight red short shorts, skimpy tank top, and perfectly picked afro.

Now, you have to remember, I'd only been in LA a month, and still prone to being starstruck every time I saw anyone I recognized from film or TV ("Hey, weren't you Calderone's Henchman #3 in an episode of 'Miami Vice' in 1986? You were AWESOME!!!"). So I was still getting over my shock at seeing Richard Simmons standing 20 feet from me when he raced over, dropped to one knee and began to serenade me with a very emotional rendition of Barbara Streisand and Neil Diamond's "You Don't Bring Me Flowers" at the top of his lungs.

Before long, every employee from both offices had filtered into the lobby to gawk at the spectacle. I tried to laugh it off as my face turned red, and even inched toward the door, trying to make a sly getaway. But that Richard Simmons is quite an agile fellow (must be all that sweating to the oldies), and he managed to block my way, while never leaving his one-kneed stance. And since Mr. Simmons unfortunately knew the whole song by heart – and really, how could he not? -- I had to just grin, wait him out, and pretend like I wasn't in a living hell. As Richard finished his song with trademark flair, the place exploded with laughter and applause -- a standing ovation that seemed to last forever.

Needless to say, because of this incident, I was a laughingstock in that office for weeks. And that only ended when I provided more ammunition for mocking by getting torn a new one by former Whitesnake frontman David Coverdale, leading to enough Tawny Kittaen jokes to last me several lifetimes. But that's a "Hollywood Horror Show" post for another day.

*I'm planning on writing a longer post on this -- my reasons for leaving L.A., how I feel about it, Colorado, the whole shebang (What the hell kind of word is "shebang", anyway?) -- so you'll have to wait for the details until then. The two of you reading this, that is. (One of them being me.)

TV Review: ‘The Mentalist’

There might not be another new show premiering this fall which I was more biased against before ever seeing than ‘The Mentalist’. Okay, that’s not technically true -- I was sure, absolutely certain, I would hate the ‘Knight Rider’ re-boot before ever watching a minute (and that’s all I ever watched). But that doesn’t really count, as I was unlucky enough to see last season’s made-for-TV movie updating the 80’s series that prompted the launch of the weekly series, and quickly realized that either NBC head honcho Ben Silverman was smoking crack when he green-lit the project, or his body just naturally produces crack all on its own. So I actually had reasons to dislike ’Knight Rider’ -- I had no such excuse for my bias against ‘The Mentalist’. It was just good, old-fashioned prejudice.

Sure, I may have experienced some trepidation caused by the fact CBS seems much more committed to advancing Simon Baker’s TV career than their viewers are. Previously, the Australian-born Baker was the lead in CBS crime drama ’The Guardian’ from 2001-2004, then starred alongside Ray Liotta and Virginia Madsen in the short-lived CBS crime drama ‘Smith’ in 2006-07. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t harbor any ill will toward Baker. In fact, I have very little feeling about him at all. Maybe that’s why I had a hard time understanding why the casting folks at CBS were so enamored.

I may have also had something against the generic quality ’The Mentalist’ seemingly had, judging from the commercials. Its title follows the revolution of blandness that threatens to engulf all of primetime network TV, especially the world of procedurals, double-especially at CBS, where formulaic procedurals go to reproduce. And the idea (or “hook” in Industry-speak*) -- that the show’s lead would somehow divine the truth behind mysteries simply by observing his subjects closely -- seemed to borrow liberally from other popular shows (’House’ and ’Psych’ to name a couple of personal favorites).

The title and premise of the show aren’t the only things which lead an experienced viewer to the opinion the show may be a bit derivative. Upon watching the first episode, yet another trademark device is revealed -- there’s the female partner to provide a little sexual tension, the quirky “team” of experts (requisite wise-cracking dude, big lovable lug, hot chick who’s also really smart, etc. -– at least they don’t have a hacker…yet).

Lastly, ’The Mentalist’ has the character twist which was once the domain of feature films, but is quickly becoming de rigeur among primetime dramas –- the horrible, scarring incident in the protagonist’s past which drives his/her motivations (and as bonus, provides the carrot-on-the-stick device the show’s writers can use to lead viewers through a season-long, possibly series-long arc –- for instance, ’The X-Files’ milked much of its nine seasons and one of its two movies out of the mystery behind the kidnap of Mulder’s sister). In this case, we learn in flashback that his wife and child were murdered by a serial killer as revenge for Baker’s character’s disrespect. This has caused him to make a major life change –- catching criminals, not profiting off them -– in hopes of someday capturing his family’s killer. Sounds like a recipe for a season finale, no?

Gathering all these facts into a neat little pile, it seemed the ceiling of ’The Mentalist’ was no higher than "guilty pleasure". But here’s the thing: with all these marks against it, all these obstacles to overcome, ’The Mentalist’ succeeds. It succeeds right from the opening scene, which pretends to be a typical teaser -- introducing a new case shrouded in mystery, before slamming the door on the viewers expectations by solving the case in its infancy and punctuating it a shocking conclusion. It succeeds on the strength of Baker’s character –- not just his performance (though that is very good), but also on the way the part is (wait for it) written. It succeeds on the lead character’s slightly off-putting demeanor and raw honesty (again, not un-like Hugh Laurie’s House) but also its patient, somewhat meandering pace, and philosophical tone.

The latter reminds one of NBC’s ’Life’**, which seems to serve as either an inspiration to ‘The Mentalist’ or at least a distant relative. Both shows have a strong, idiosyncratic lead with a dark past played by a foreign-born actor (as does, yet again, ’House’ -- the trend is your friend), both have the sexy female partner (the underrated and over-freckled Robin Tunney in this case), the quirky team, and just a touch of –- dare I say it? -– soul.

While ‘The Mentalist’ is not quite on the level of ’Life’, it has just enough personality/philosophy/humanity to raise it above the average procedural, and to keep those of us who prefer to think of ourselves as intelligent from losing self-respect for watching it. That’s enough to take the “guilty” right out of “guilty pleasure”.

Using the age-old Hollywood scale of judgment –- HIGHLY RECOMMEND/RECOMMEND/CONSIDER/PASS (circle one) -– I rate ‘The Mentalist’:

RECOMMEND


*”Industrese?”
**This is one of the best shows on network TV, but Silverman moved it to the Friday night slot where good shows go to die, like he does with every decent show he gets his smug little hands on (see: 'Friday Night Lights') -- so better watch it now before it's cancelled due to poor ratings.

Week 5 Postmortem: The Gary Kubiak/Sage Rosenfels Murder-Suicide Watch

I’ll wait until all the games are done to total up the records and accounting from my theoretical gambling spree, but after Sunday at least three things seem clear: 1) I won money this week (theoretically), 2) Sage Rosenfels just got axed from Gary Kubiak’s Christmas card list, and 3) Sage Rosenfels just got added to Tony Dungy’s Christmas card list.

Of all the winner/loser (non-spread) picks I made this week, Houston was the one I felt the least sure about. Sure, I they were due, and the Colts are a mere shadow of their former selves, but still: it’s Colts v.Texans, and we all know how that usually turns out.

Through 56+ minutes of the game, I had forgotten all about those doubts – probably because I was too busy patting myself on the back for being right. Unfortunately, it appears Rosenfels, playing for the sick Matt Schaub, was busy doing the same thing. After turning in a great performance just when the Texans needed it most, Sage lived down to his name, producing an unbelievable choke job just when the Texans could afford it least. Houston, picked by many to be a darkhorse playoff contender this year, was 0-3, and their coach, Gary Kubiak was starting to feel the heat. They badly needed a win, and they played like it, jumping out to a 17 point lead. The Colts, on the other hand, were in nearly as bad a spot (worse, considering their usual expectations): 1-2 -- and lucky to have the "1" after a crazy 4th quarter comeback to win in Minnesota -- and about to fall to 1-3.

But, similar to their game in Minnesota, the Colts again refused to quit down big on the road, scoring a TD with 4:04 remaining to draw within 10. Their attempt at an onside kick failed, so Rosenfels and Co. took over, just needing a couple of first downs to ice his team’s first win. After two short runs – and two quick Indy timeouts – the Texans faced a 3rd and 8, and that’s when things got crazy. Rosenfels dropped back to pass, then scrambled left, getting so near the sticks, he felt he could get the first down with one good John Elway-esque lunge/dive thing. He very well may have gotten the mark, had he held onto the ball. But before he landed, the ball was knocked lose, and Gary Brackett scooped it up and rambled 68 yards for a score.

Now the score was suddenly 27-24, and the Colts could smell blood in the water. And Texans could smell the stank coming off Rosenfels’ decaying performance – he quickly fumbled again, leading to another Colts TD, then followed that up with a game-clinching interception into a sea of Colt defenders without a Texan in site. For those of you scoring at home, that’s three possessions resulting three turnovers in three minutes. That’s efficiency, my friends.

The Texans now drop to 0-4, all but eliminating them from the playoff hunt, and raising questions about Kubiak’s job security -- not to mention Sage Rosenfels' mental and physical well-being.

Meanwhile, elsewhere around the league:

--The Philadelphia Eagles, everybody’s consensus pick as the 2nd best team in the league to Dallas after their MNF shootout in Week 2, suffered their second straight loss, falling to 2-3. The ease with which they dispatched the Rams in the opening week and put points on the board at Dallas in Week 2 had everybody raving, but the Rams are the Rams, and the Cowboys D has been known to give up points in bunches in the past. Since then, the Iggles eeked out an ugly win vs. a banged-up Steeler team, caught a beat-down at Chicago, and lost at home to the Skins after jumping out to a 14-0 1st quarter lead. Does that sound like a dominant team to you? Suddenly, Washington -- a team written off by many prognosticators despite making the playoffs last year (unlike Philly) -- looks to be head and shoulders above them -- especially after playing all their NFC East road games already on their way to a 4-1 record. [UPDATE: Brian Westbrook broke two ribs Sunday -- that's not going to help Philly's chances.]

--Also at 2-3 after predictions of a Super Bowl run are the San Diego Chargers. This is what I wrote about them in the weekend preview:

“San Diego is the toughest team to pick in the league -- they seem capable of beating anyone or losing to anyone, anytime, anywhere.”

Of course, I followed that up by writing this:

“But I think they've overcome the rough start, and are ready to pile up a few W's.”

In my defense, they were playing the Dolphins, and had no excuse for playing so poorly. Still, they're the Chargers, and that's what they do-- underachieve right up until the point you give up on them, then start flashing their talent. The next time I start judging the Bolts on what they should do based on their talent, somebody please remind me that Norv Turner is still their head coach.

--But for every underachieving enigma of a team threatening to implode when they should be rolling, there's an overachieving team jelling right before our eyes into a force to be reckoned with. Buffalo has looked like a budding power in the AFC East -- at least until Sunday, when starting QB Trent Edwards was knocked out less than five minutes into the game, leading to a blowout loss to Arizona (they're still 4-1), The Dolphins appear to be a contender for most improved team this year. Baltimore suffered a tough, controversial loss (due to an iffy roughing the passer call late) to undefeated Tennessee this week, but looks to be much better than last year's squad.

But my pick for the biggest pleasant surprise so far this year is the performance of the Atlanta Falcons under first-year coach (and famous no-name) Mike Smith. Michael Turner has lived up to all the hype, producing prolifically for Atlanta, just as he did when given a chance in San Diego. But the highlight has to be Matt Ryan, who I must admit I was never overly impressed with at Boston College, despite all the acclaim (I thought his high number of INT's in college did not bode well for his NFL chances). Ryan has looked like the real deal already, and with young skill players surrounding him, they could be a power in the NFC for years to come. Especially if they get that guy Vick back. What, too soon?

--I know the O-line could've done a better job protecting him, the receivers dropped several passes, and it didn't help that Frank Gore was under-utilized, but after his three pick game against the Pats, I’m officially back to calling the Niners QB “Just Turn Overs” until further notice. I'm also back to calling Mike Nolan "Dead Man Walking".