You know the drill, some questions answered for the game this weekend, this time complements of Blogging the Boys contributor Brandon W. My answers to their questions will be up some time soon, I'd imagine. Enjoy:

Hogs Haven: What if anything is Tony Romo not going to be able to do under center that he would otherwise be fine at supposing he wasn't recovering from an injury? Anything exploitable?

Blogging The Boys: Apparently Tony Romo is able to do everything he could do before he got hurt and by all accounts is throwing the ball pretty well. The questions surrounding Romo's return are not really on how the injury will affect him, but how the time away from the game will. They say the great quarterbacks are able to step in after an injury and pick up right where they left off, so long as that injury doesn't linger. There's no doubt that having Romo back will infuse this team with some much needed hope and energy and it looks as though Romo has found that energetic spark he's had in the past that was missing earlier in the season. It's amazing what a few games on the sideline will do for your outlook towards the game. As far anything being exploitable, I would say it's going to be the same old Romo out there; a guy who like to take chances and will sometimes force the ball into tight coverage. However, a reinvigorated Romo could be very dangerous to the Redskins and other teams moving forward. The key for this matchup is for the Redskins to apply as much pressure as they can on Romo, because he might be a bit skittish of having that hand knocked into. The Cowboys' offensive line hasn't played up to par this year and Romo was getting hit more than ever when he got hurt against Arizona. Put pressure on him and force him to get rid of the ball quickly and the Redkskins could do a good job of disrupting the offenses timing.

HH: I'm of the opinion that QB pressure plays at least as big a role in generating turnovers as does good secondary play. You guys have a lot of sacks, apparently have gotten some pressure on opposing quarterbacks, but virtually no interceptions. Any reason for that?

BTB: There's a couple of factors that can explain the lack of turnovers the defense has generated. First you have to look at which quarterbacks the Cowboys have faced. Aaron Rodgers, Donovan McNabb, Jeff Garcia, Kurt Warner and Jason Campbell are all averaging well under an interception a game and have done a great job of finding open receivers when pressured. The Cowboys were able to put pressure on these quarterbacks but for some reason weren't able to force bad decisions. A great example of this would be the game against Tampa Bay when the Cowboys repeatedly had Jeff Garcia on the run, yet was constantly throwing the ball out of everyone's reach, something he is doing exceptionally well this season.

Another reason could be the scheme the Cowboys are running with their secondary. The Cowboys have been playing a zone, soft coverage scheme all year in an effort to minimize the big plays against them and keep the receivers in front of them. This prevents the defenders from playing aggressively on the ball and relies on the pass rush to force bad throws. If the quarterback is able to throw the ball accurately, the defenders haven't been in position to make plays on the ball, thus negating the chances for an interception to occur.

The last few games the Cowboys defense had become much stronger in the pass rush and were able to force three turnovers against the Giants, including an interception return for a touchdown by rookie corner Mike Jenkins. The return of outside linebacker Anthony Spencer will allow the Cowboys more options with the blitz and should provide more opportunities for forcing the quarterback into bad decisions. Now we just need the secondary to capitalize.

HH: What is going on with Roy Williams right now? He hasn't been too loud in Dallas just yet, and wasn't playing too loud in Detroit prior to the trade. Is it a lack of chemistry? Can Brad Johnson be blamed?

BTB: First of all I don't see anyone playing too "loud" up in Detroit right now, so I don't see how his lack of production there this season is anything to be worried about.

Roy Williams arrival to the Cowboys came with some very bad timing; as he was walking onto the practice field Tony Romo was walking off for the next month. In his three games with the Cowboys, not only has he failed to produce but the entire offense has been anemic. We got to see flashes of Roy Williams can bring to the table, including a clutch touchdown grab against Tampa Bay and an absolutely incredible one handed catch on the sideline against the Giants. Unfortunately that's about all the action that has gone his way. See the funny thing about receivers is that for them to be effective they actually have to have the ball thrown in their direction, something that wasn't happening at all with Brad Johnson at quarterback.

Williams hasn't made any excuses or mentioned a lack of knowledge of the playbook, so now it's just a matter of getting the ball in his hands. That task now falls into the lap of Tony Romo and Jason Garrett. Romo was able to build on field chemistry with T.O. almost immediately after he became a starter and I don't see a problem with that now with him and Williams. If the Redskins decide they want to focus on taking Owens out of the game, then Romo needs to realize how talented a receiver there is on the opposite side just willing to go up and get the ball.

HH: Terrell Owens called out DeAngelo Hall this week. What do you see from T.O. in this upcoming game? What does he, or the coaching staff, need to do differently to see normal production from Owens?

BTB: I almost feel bad for Owens. He was having a rough go of it earlier in the year and was having difficulty beating the press off the line of scrimmage. When he was getting open, he and Romo were misfiring a bit for whatever reason. Then he started to beat the coverage and find himself open countless times, yet Brad Johnson repeatedly was unable to get him the ball which is the most frustrating thing to happen to a star receiver. They want it thrown to them, but when it is they also need it catchable.  That has been happening the past few months. The responsibility also lies on Cowboys offensive coordinator Jason Garrett's shoulders. Last year the Cowboys were able to find mismatches for Owens across the board, putting him in different spots on the field nearly every play, which resulted in Owens having a free release against linebackers and safeties. Garrett needs to find a way to get back to these mismatches for Owens to be effective. Make no mistake about it, Owens is the Cowboys' most dangerous weapon and for them to have success they must find a way to get him the ball. The return of Romo and the addition of Roy Williams should (in theory) take some of the load off Owens and free him to do what he does best.

I also want to say how impressed I have been by Owens' attitude the past month. If ever there was a prime opportunity for a T.O. blowup, this was it. The team was losing, the quarterbacks were inept and even better the Cowboys traded for another top receiver and signed him to a long term deal. Yet Owens has kept his cool and while it's obvious his isn't happy with how things have gone he also hasn't gone crazy on the team or coaches.Owens realizes this is his last chance to win it all, and I am sure he doesn't want to blow it. Completely ignoring Ed Werder helps.

HH: Please tell me everything you know about Felix Jones and his availability for the upcoming game. I have no interest in seeing him on the field.

BTB: When  on the field Felix the Cat has been nothing short of fantastic and his absence has left the running game with some issues. His return would mean a whole new dimension to this offense and could help take some of the pressure off Romo.

Fortunately for the Redskins and bad for us, it seems as if Felix Jones will not be able to go after missing yet another practice on Friday. So there you have it.

(You are not reading about this because I refuse to have anything to say on the subject. Readers are free to discuss whatever they'd like.)

Long odds those furry critters had against the evil Empire, which frames well this week's game against the Dallas Cowboys. Depending on who you ask, the Redskins are something like a 10-11 point dog ewok, which is the biggest margin of the gambling week. That's especially distressing in light of the fact that someone has to play Kansas City.

The importance of a sploding the death star cannot be overstated, and hinges largely on where one shoots. In this instance, Terrell Owens is a womp rat sized target:

[Last year at Texas Stadium] Shawn Springs was matched up in man coverage on Owens for most of that half, and though Owens beat him to the corner of the end zone for a four-yard TD, Owens didn't hurt the Skins otherwise in that half (four other receptions for 40 total yards. Washington had yet to give up the big play - QB Tony Romo's longest pass in the first two quarters was for 23 yards.

But the Skins went to much more of a zone look in the second half, the corners played deeper off the line, and they were burned repeatedly for it. Three of Owen's four catches in the second half were for long TDs, with linebacker London Fletcher, and safeties Pierson Prioleau and Reed Doughty among those who got caught making coverage mistakes. Sean Taylor was hurt for that game, with the season about to take a sickeningly horrible turn, and the secondary was in disarray in the second half, with communication between the safeties and corners problematic to say the least.

Yea so that sucked, etc. and raises questions why we make adjustments to the strategies that work. That might be Jacksonville's problem now, but I digress. I would happily sacrifice our old strategy of lining up #1 and #2 CB on their side regardless of who lines up opposite them (like Carlos Rogers yo) in favor of just painting Shawn Springs on T.O. every minute of the game. I'd send him over to the Cowboys sideline, if possible. They should carpool.

Crikeys I'm too honest to ever succeed at blogging. Over two years ago I made a ridiculous case that Santana Moss was a better receiver than Terrell Owens. I was wrong. My heart was in the right place, the actual results were not. But, for the first time since 2005, I'd wager, Santana Moss is owning Terrell Owens statistically by traditional and better metrics. On a long enough timeline, many even ridiculous claims have a good shot at validating eventually, so here's to hoping for a 2008 that looks like 2005, for Moss at least.

And for us, since that was both the last time I didn't attend the Cowboys-Redskins game at Texas Stadium and also the last time we won. My fault.

Why didn't the league schedule the final game at Texas Stadium betwixt the Redskins and Cowboys? You spend 50 years developing this intensely bitter rivalry only to squander perhaps the once every 50 year opportunity to actively encourage this bitter hatred, and you give it to the Ravens? On NFL Network? I'm about half as pissed off by that as any self-respecting Dallas Cowboys fan should be. As crazy as this sounds, instead of giving Texas Stadium a proper funeral at the hands of the Washington Redskins, a team the Cowboys have history with and have played more than any other team in the league, you give it to the Baltimore Ravens who the Cowboys are 0-2 against or, put differently, the team they've played fewer times than anyone else in the league? Cool beans, NFL. Looking over the list of their opponents, there quite literally isn't a single team the Cowboys could have played in the final game of Texas Stadium history that would be less interesting. The Texans are the only other team to have played the Cowboys as little as the Ravens, and at least that represents state pride fight night.

Anyways, I'll ask Dave of Blogging the Boys about it later this week. In the meantime, scope out their concerns for this weekend:

Jason Campbell is a young QB with a mountain of potential. He played really well against us last year, throwing for almost 350 yards and two scores in Dallas. It took some T.O. heroics for us to pull that game out.

No one's saying Campbell is near Romo. But he can hurt us. We need to get pressure on him and keep pressure off Romo. The Deadskins are hurting with injuries. Jason Taylor is sitting this game out.

I'll take it.

Suffice to say this goes double true for us, given that we're the damned underdogs in this fight and pressure without blitz is the great equalizer in the NFL. If Tony Romo can pass comfortably with all the time in the world, it won't matter what T.O.'s stat line looks like because whatever omissions exist in his TD column will be filled by production in Jason Witten's. Speaking to yesterday: No one is going to beat the Cowboys for us, and if we want to do so, on the road, it will take more than crossed fingers. Chris Wilson save us and nom nom nom Tony Romo.

(NO FEAR.)

via virtualhug.files.wordpress.com

There it is:

force or speed of movement; impetus, as of a physical object or course of events: The car gained momentum going downhill. Her career lost momentum after two unsuccessful films.

Len Pasquarelli almost got it (inadvertently, as you'll see):

More than 40 years ago, then-Supreme Court justice Potter Stewart, speaking on pornography, conceded that he could not adequately define the issue being debated in front of him and his eight colleagues. "But," Stewart said, "I know it when I see it."

 

Same can be said for momentum, which is arguably even harder to identify.

I say almost right because he adds that "arguably" into it and suggests people can identify momentum if and when they see it. He provides one example:

But if you were around the Dallas Cowboys on Sunday evening, squeezing through big bodies and stepping over shoulder pads and rolled up athletic tape in the hole-in-the-wall niche that serves as the visitor's locker room at Giants Stadium, you could actually see momentum. It was there, tangible, palpable, real and undeniable, for everyone toting a tape recorder or a minicam to witness.

Of course by "Sunday evening" he meant December 3rd, 2006 after the Cowboys beat the Giants 23-20. The, er, tangible, palpable, real and undeniable result of that momentum was a 42-17 loss to the New Orleans Saints a week later, their worse loss of the year. After that, er, visible momentum the Cowboys went 1-3 culminating in their humiliating one point loss to the Seattle Seahawks on a botched extra point hold by Tony Romo.

So, thanks Len, Mr. Pasquarelli ultimately did have something very meaningful to say about momentum, namely, even the people who are allegedly most qualified to identify it can't do so. Yet it is always assumed to be present; Dan Wetzel has an excellent article in Yahoo Sports (hat tip: Chris Mottram @ The Sporting Blog) discussing the merits of the two point conversion (genius!):

There are so many variables in a football game – momentum, weather, matchups, fatigue, play calling, etc. – that each 2-point conversion should be treated as an isolated action and not part of some statistical trend compiled by other teams against other opponents in other situations often in other seasons.

Although one might wonder why barely-if-at-all-observable "momentum" is placed in the same sentence as weather, matchups, fatigue, and play calling, since all these things are hardly abstract concepts.

I'm not picking on anybody. I talk about momentum. You talk about momentum. We all talk about momentum. I can recall using the word "momentum" as it relates to football just a few days ago. I was using the vague concept to try and justify my two-point conversion strategy; I was saying that teams have "momentum" after scoring a touchdown and thus their odds of successfully converting were better. This is of course absurd, since the data already accounted for "momentum." I am stupid.

The main problem with momentum is that, because we can't quantify it, it means nothing and everything at the same time. Did Mike Shanahan beat the Chargers because he had "momentum"? Sure, why not. Huh, my fever abated. Must've been that eye of newt and toe of frog brew I drank. This is how Lisa Simpson keeps tigers away with a rock.

If it can't be identified with any great accuracy, then what's the point of discussing it? Even if there is some mystical force called "momentum" affecting the outcome of games, we're as likely to notice its presence as miss the boat, so why even try and account for the results by guidance of what amounts to witch's brew?

Actually, it's worse than that. If the only problem with the concept of "momentum" was that it was nebulous in the sense that identification of it was nigh impossible, then fine, whatever, at least it gives those of us who write about sports for fun an opportunity to play make believe about the whys and hows of football. Good print and all that, etc.

But, er, it isn't merely muddily defined, in fact, it might actually be imaginary. Momentum doesn't exist. There is no such thing as momentum.

I was reading through University of California Herman Royer Professor of Political Economy David Romer's epically awesome paper: Do Firms Maximize? Evidence from Professional Football. His basic premise is that NFL coaches routinely depart from the rational decisions that would maximize their potential for winning by kicking field goals when they shouldn't or punting when they shouldn't. It is precisely the kind of statistically interesting and word-by-word justified (43 pages later I'm nodding my head and saying: he just covered it all) you won't find here, there, or anywhere in the NFL world. Where Len Pasquarelli is saying cmon you can just feel it touch it sense it so it must be there Romer is one of those party poopers who says: I will prove this for you.

And wouldn't you know it, in his analysis he takes the time to address a number of concerns, among them the concept of "MOMENTUM" as it relates to his strategy. As this analysis is absolutely momentous, I quote the short section in its near entirety (some emphasis added, just scroll down to the bold for the conclusion, if you're not interested in checking the data):

Momentum. Failing on fourth down could be costly to a team's chances of winning not just through its effect on possession and field position, but also through its effect on energy and emotions. As a result, it might be more costly for the other team to have the ball as a result of stopping a fourth-down attempt than for it to have the ball at the same place on the field in the course of a normal drive or as the result of a punt. In this case, the analysis would understate the cost of a failed fourth-down attempt.

There are two reasons to be skeptical of this possibility... Second, studies of momentum in other sports have found at most small momentum effects (see, for example, Gilovich, Vallone, and Tversky, 1985; Albright, 1993; and Klaassen and Magnus, 2001[*]).

More importantly, it is possible to obtain direct evidence about whether outcomes differe systematically from normal after plays whose outcomes are either very bad or very good. [Romer discusses sample size and his definitions of very bad and very good plays, click link to see for yourself, although data set is 636 very bad plays vs. 628 very good plays.] I then examine what happens from the situation immediately following the extreme play to the next situation, from that situation to the next, and from that situation to the subsequent one. In each case, I ask whether the realized values of these situations one situation later differ systematically from the V's for those situations. That is, I look at hte means of the relevant [math sign I cannot reproduce here] (always computed from the perspective of the team that had the ball before the very bad or very good play).

The results provide no evidence of momentum effects. All the point estimates are small and highly insignificant; the largest t-statitistic (in absolute value) is less than 1.3. Moreover, the largest point estimate (again in absolute value) goes the wrong direction from the point of view of the momentum hypothesis: from the situation immediately following a very bad play to the next, the team that lost possession does somewhat better than average.

(All typos from above are my own and not Professor Romer's.)

Long winded as that is, the point simply being: Momentum? Does not compute.

The issue with momentum is not that it exists and we can't find it, but that it doesn't exist at all! Whatever it is Len Pasquarelli, you, me, every single person who has spoken about football from a broadcast booth or television studio thinks we can just see, feel, know or gleen, it ain't momentum (I have used the term in 15 different storiess at Hogs Haven; impressively, readers have only fallen prey to its allure in one fanpost).

I'm putting momentum to bed and promise to try my bestest not to use the term in the future. In fairness to the coaches Romer is roasting in the above paper -- the ones he thinks should go for it more often -- I think it's only fair that they get an opportunity for response. A while back Greg Garber did just that at ESPN. Here's what they thought of this stupid paper, evidence, science what's that, etc.:

"This is a professor from Cal-Berzerkely?" asked Giants head coach Jim Fassel, in the true tradition of a former Stanford man.

Fassel turned a sheet with the equation on it sideways, then upside down in a humorous attempt to absorb its subtleties.

"What does the professor coach?" Fassel asked. "Maybe," he added, "he needs a few more classes to teach. Too much free time?"

"The crowd is going 'Go for it,' and they're just drinking beers and just going for it," Mariucci said. "Sometimes you get swayed a little bit. So you've got to block them out and you've got to make sense of it all.

"So then you start thinking about that article the guy from Cal wrote and then you say, 'Well, what would he do in this situation?' "

Hey this sounds familiar, emphasis added:

"If I don't get the first down, what are the repercussions?" asked Packers head coach Mike Sherman. "Are they moving the football? If you're on the road and don't get that fourth down the momentum is going to change over to the other team."

Momentum, according to coaches (see sidebar), is a matter of some consequence in fourth-down situations. But Romer -- a man as serious as an economist can be -- doesnt' pretend to offer an infallible system, just a guideline. That's why he couches his conclusions with the words "on average."

(Which raises the obvious question: Did any of the people interviewed read the entire paper? There it is, in big bold letters, an entire section on the Great Myth of Momentum under Section IV Complications -- great thing about academics is they have to actually address contrary opinions as opposed to merely stating them.)

Brian Billick, the cerebral head coach of the Baltimore Ravens, isn't so sure about all of the professor's numbers.

"There are only two numbers," Billick said. "And those are 50-50. You either make it, or you don't."

And at least one guy who appreciates the good Professor's work:

Bill Walsh, another Bay Area professor with some serious tenure, is a believer.

"To this day, I can close my eyes and see 22 players," he said in his San Francisco 49ers office, where he still serves the team as a consultant. "I can see them moving and I can see the equation. My indicators would be somewhat different than (Romer's), but this (equation) is what it takes."

Huh. Jim Fassel. Steve Mariucci. Mike Sherman. Brian Billick. Bill Walsh. Which one of these is not like the others?

* If you're interested in these papers the cites are:

Gilovich, Thomas, Robert Vallone, and Amos Tversky. 1985. "The Hot Hand in Basketball: On the Misperception of Random Sequences." Cognitive Science 17 (July): 295-314.

Albright, S. Christian. 1993. "A Statistical Analysis of Hitting Streaks in Baseball." Journal of the American Statistical Association 88 (December): 1175-1183.

Klaassen, Franc J. G. M., and Jan R. Magnus. 2001. "Are Points in Tennis Independent and Identically Distributed? Evidence from a Dynamic Binary Panel Data Model." Journal of the American Statistical Association 96 (June): 500-509.

So much for momentum.

Final NFC East roundtable questions via Grizz from Blogging the Boys. A recap of the Redskins 13-10 win over the Buffalo Bills this weekend is pending and I will hopefully try to get that up tonight. The issue is that I am moving cities at the end of this week and have many loose ends to tie up here in my current city of residence before I belt town, meaning my time is at a premium right now. I'll do my best, but you guys would do me a huge service if you kept the place hopping until I return to escuela.

Anyways, Grizz's answers to our NFC East roundtable questions are below. Enjoy:

The NFC East is brutal in terms of the depth and quality of its teams. Can you think of another division that is even close in terms of talent and competitiveness?

Grizz: I think the AFC South would be only other one that has the quality of teams at the top of the division and depth throughout. The NFC East has returned to its former glory as a division that produces Super Bowl winners and everybody in the division is considered a dangerous team for any opponent. The intra-division wars are about as good as it gets in the NFL right now. I like the AFC South, there are some real quality teams over there, but I'm sticking with the NFC East as the best.

2. Was the Giants Super Bowl victory a fluke?
   
   Grizz: Fluke is probably not the right word. I still don't think they were the best team in football last year, but they did what many surprise winners have done – get hot come playoff time and ride that momentum to a championship. There's nothing wrong with that, it doesn't make you any less of a champion. In the NFL, you actually have to beat you're opponents on the field to advance and the Giants did that. Surprsing? Maybe. Fluke? no.
3. What new player on any of the teams -- draft pick, free agent or trade acquisition -- will make the biggest impact within the division this season?
   
   Grizz: Zach Thomas will really help the Cowboys in the middle against the run. He looked great in camp and preseason so far. Assante Samuel in Philly could be another guy. I'll also keep an eye on Jason Taylor to see if he, like his partner Zach Thomas, is still capable if dominating.
4. Your team will win the division, and possibly the Super Bowl, if ...
   
   Grizz: Tony Romo stays healthy, Adam Jones gets reinstated and plays up to his potential and Wade Phillips/Tony Romo finally figure out what's holding them back in the postseason.
5. Your team will finish last in the division if ...
   
   Grizz Injuries decimate this team or somehow the team chemistry starts to unravel. We got a lot of high-profile, out-sized egos in our locker room and some of them come with shady pasts. So far, everything has blended very smoothly but if that chemistry turns explosive, we could have trouble.
6. What team in the NFC has the best shot at keeping an NFC East team out of the Super Bowl?
   
   Grizz: I think Seattle's chance might have past them by and the Vikings would be the obvious pick if they had good QB/WR play.  Aaron Rodgers in Green Bay leaves them as a question mark. How about New Orleans? They fell apart last year but there is still a lot of talent on that club.
7. Give me one player on your team everyone else might not know about, but who could wind up making a name for himself this season.
   
   Grizz: Miles Austin, a three-year UDFA who has been hanging around at WR and looks like he might finally be getting it. He has all the physical tools you need to be a great WR; fast, big, ability to get open, but he's had problems with consistently catching the football. Over training camp and the first preseason game, he's looked very sharp and Dallas is searching for deep threat opposite T.O. which neither Patrick Crayton nor Sam Hurd can provide. It's kind of a longshot, but keep your eye open for Austin
8. Rank the starting quarterbacks within the division.
   
   Grizz: Tony Romo – Still has to win in the postseason, but if I had to pick a QB from these four for my team going forward, I'd take Romo

Donovan McNabb - I think time and injuries have taken a little luster off of McNabb, but he's still a very good QB.

Eli Manning – Great job in the playoff/Super Bowl run, but he's had some rough years with the Giants. If he does something great again this year, he's moves up rapidly.
 
Jason Campbell – Looks like he has a ton of potential, but he's still behind the other guys in the division right now.

9. Rank the coaches within the division.
   
   Grizz: Andy Reid – Has been so consistently good with the Eagles. I don't like his offense but he gets it to work and usually has a good defense.

Tom Coughlin – He moves up to second by virtue of the playoff run and Super Bowl win. He's had some success in the past but he was on the verge of being run out of New York for losing the team. But whatever he did last year, it was the right move and he won big.

Wade Phillips – The only flaw on Wade as a coach is he can't win in the postseason, and that didn't change last year. He's got to get it done this year in the postseason or he'll always be remembered as a good coach who failed when it mattered most.

Jim Zorn – We just don't know about him so he has to serve his time at the bottom.

10. Finally, what is your predicted order of finish in the NFC East? Why?
    
    Grizz: Cowboys – Without being too much of a homer, I really do believe on paper the Cowboys have the best roster in the division and in the conference. They won the division last year; the regular season isn't their problem, it's what comes after.

Eagles – I think they'll rebound and have a pretty good year if McNabb stays healthy.

Giants – They get the post-Super Bowl blues. I know the Giants fans hate when people say this, but I'm not convinced they can do it again. Yes, I'm convinced they whipped the Cowboys in the playoffs last year, but I need to seem them put together a consistent year, not an uneven run followed by a brilliant playoff run.

Redskins – New coach and a QB who is still learning, and now must learn a new system gives me doubts. I think they'll be a quality team, they are just stuck in a brutal division.

NFC East Roundtable continues with Bleeding Green Nation's JasonB answering the same 10 questions in Re: NFC East and NFC/NFL generally. I just have to say he must have a great mind because a) I agree with so many of his answers and b) picks the 'Skins to win the division. Many thanks to BGN for taking the time to answer the questions and enjoy:

The NFC East is brutal in terms of the depth and quality of its teams. Can you think of another conference that is even close in terms of talent and competitiveness?

BGN: I think the AFC South is a tougher division than the NFC East. Record wise last year and as far as teams sent to the postseason they're very similar. The Colts are likely the best team in either division and I think the Houston Texans have the potential to be the most improved team in either division. Plus, they're playing in a tougher conference overall... The NFC East is probably #2, but I have to give the nod to the AFC South

Considering the fierceness of the rivalries within the division, how tough was it to watch the Giants win the Super Bowl last season?

BGN: Depends on what you call a fluke. Was it a fluke in the sense that they were not the best team in the league yet won anyway? Yes. However, I don't really think it was that big a fluke that they got there. I told everyone that when they drew Dallas it was the best possible matchup they could have hoped for and that they'd win that one. Basically, if you make the playoffs in the NFL I don't think it can ever really be considered a fluke if you end up winning it all. Funny enough, the Patriots were bigger underdogs when they beat the Rams then the Giants were when they beat the Pats... and NO ONE looks back on that Pat/Rams superbowl and thinks it was a fluke.

What new player on any of the teams -- draft pick, free agent or trade acquisition -- will make the biggest impact within the division this season?

BGN: I'll say Asante Samuel for one simple reason. Last year the Eagles were tied for the fewest INTs in the NFL. So they go add the NFL INT leader over the past 2 years. I heard Sal Palontonio say recently that the Eagles lost more games by 8 points or less(or one score) than any other team in football last year. There's no way you can tell me that a few extra turnovers here and there could not have swung at least a few games the Eagles way and therefore put them in the postseason. So this year, having that guy with a knack for turnovers playing with the guys we missed due to injury last year(Brian Dawkins and Lito Sheppard) should be a tremendous boost to our chances.

Your team will win the division, and possibly the Super Bowl, if ...

BGN: Same answer to this one it is every year... If McNabb can stay healthy and if he can't whether we can get good QB play in his absence. Last year, he was still getting over the knee surgery all year and did miss a few games... In those games AJ Feeley threw about 3 picks a game. Two years ago, when the Eagles actually won this division last, McNabb went down and we ended up getting fantastic play from Jeff Garcia. So, if McNabb stays healthy then we should have as good a shot as anyone in this conference... if not, we pray that Kevin Kolb is the real deal...

Your team will finish last in the division if ...

BGN: See the opposite of #4. I'll also include turnovers here. The Eagles defense was actually quite stout last year. Thy didn't surrender many points, they were one of the better teams against the run, and I believe ended up as the #8 ranked D in the leauge... but they were woeful in forcing turnovers. So if the additon of Asante Samuel and the return of Lito and Dawkins does not solve that lack of turnovers, we could be in trouble.

What team in the NFC has the best shot at keeping an NFC East team out of the Super Bowl?

BGN: The Vikes are the sexy pick this year... but until Tarvaris Jackson proves he's an NFL QB they can't be for real. So I guess by process of elimination I'll say the Saints, but honestly I'm not very confident in them either. It's really not a very good conference.

Give me one player on your team everyone else might not know about, but who could wind up making a name for himself this season.

BGN: Stewart Bradley. The Eagles 4th round pick from a year ago out of Nebraska has won the starting middle linebacker job and so far has looked absolutely fantastic. He started 2 games at the end of last year as rookie and had a sack and an INT. He's a big guy that moves well and seems to have his nose in every play. I think he could be poised to be a real impact player.

Rank the starting quarterbacks within the division.

BGN: I'll still maintain that Donovan McNabb is the most talented QB witht he best physical tools in this division. I think his numbers are record soeak for itself... however, this isn't 2004 anymore I can't deny his inability to stay healthy over the past fews years. That said, last year when most Eagles fans thought he looked horrible trying to get over his knee injury from the previous year... McNabb threw 19 TDs and just 7 picks in 14 games while completing over 60% of his passes. Not a bad year for most QBs, but it goes toshow the high standard he's set.

As for the other guys, you gotta give Manning credit. He got the Giants the superbowl he was drafted to bring them. He's still an interception machine and has steadily gotten worse in that dept so that has to change... Romo hasn't prven he can win a big game and ultimately that's how you measure a QB. In that dept(playoff.big game success), there's just no deying that he's well behind Manning and McNabb. Campbell has all the tools to be very very good, we just need to see him actually do it.

Manning
McNabb
Romo
Campbell

Rank the coaches within the division.

BGN: The fact that Andy Reid has been in the NFC East for 10 years and has had so much success means he remains at the top of my list. Sure, we could look at last year only and say Tom Couglin won the superbowl so he must be the best coach... but if you take a wider view I think it's hard to argue that Reid is still the top guy for now. He's won this division what? 6 or 7 times? Plus, let's not forget that his coaching tree includes the catalyst for the Giants success last year, Steve Spagnulo. The Vikings are everyone's sexy pick this year and they're coached by a former Reid guy, the Ravens hired one of Reid's long time assistants this year...  When other coaches and owners in the division and around the NFL are looking to your staff to improve themselves, that speaks volumes about the kind of success you've had and the esteem you're held in.

Reid
Coughlin
Zorn
Phillips

At least Jim Zorn hasn't proven he can't win in the postseason yet, unlike Bum's boy.

Finally, what is your predicted order of finish in the NFC East? Why?

BGN: This was actually what I predicted last year and it didn't happen... so I'm going to give it another shot this time around.

Skins
Eagles
Cowboys
Giants

I actually am predicting that the Eagles and 'Boys will have identical records... The Skins, all I can say is taht I just have a feeling. I think Campbell will put it together this year. The Giants have lost too much and haven't done enough to replace it to keep up. Although, I thought losing Tiki last year would be a death blow... so Giants fans shouldn't loose sleep over that pick... Finally, I think Dallas has a much tougher schedule than last year and it really seemed that teams got them figured out offensively by the end of last year.

Thanks again to JasonB and you are once again encouraged to discuss vigorously his answers in the comments section. Check out them tags.

I appreciate ETVal's (of Big Blue View) efforts to get this thing up and running. He emailed the NFC East bloggers a while ago to solicit answers to 10 NFC related questions for the upcoming season and, a bit tardy, we finally started responding. I've got his answers and Bleeding Green Nation's answers (which I will schedule to post later this week, to spread it out). You can find my answers to his questions at BBV here.You'll find the questions and Ed's answers below, unedited. Enjoy:

The NFC East is brutal in terms of the depth and quality of its teams. Can you think of another conference that is even close in terms of talent and competitiveness?

BBV: No. The NFC East has four legitimate playoff caliber teams. In my mind, no other conference comes close to that kind of depth.



Was the Giants Super Bowl victory a fluke?

BBV: Absolutely not. It certainly was unexpected, but it wasn't a fluke. The Giants played incredibly, and they earned each victory. There weren't any crazy, fluke plays -- no 'Tuck Rule' plays or any of that nonsense. To me, the Giants are a talented team that had actually under-achieved for a long time. They finally had a stretch where they played up to their ability, and it came at the perfect time. That said, do I expect them to repeat? No. I expect them to be very good, but I'm not foolish enough to think they will win it all again.



What new player on any of the teams -- draft pick, free agent or trade acquisition -- will make the biggest impact within the division this season?

BBV: Adam Jones. He's a tremendous talent, but also potentially a tremendous trouble-maker. He could help the Cowboys reach the Super Bowl. Or, he could help them implode and miss the playoffs entirely.



Your team will win the division, and possibly the Super Bowl, if ...

BBV: First and foremost, Eli Manning stays healthy. I have no faith that the Giants can win games without him. Defensively, the Giants will need Mathias Kiwanuka healthy all season to make up for the retirement of Michael Strahan. Also, the development of young players like Aaron Ross, Terrell Thomas, Michael Johnson and No. 1 pick Kenny Phillips in the secondary could take this defense to another level.



Your team will finish last in the division if ...

BBV: Eli Manning can't stay healthy. Also, if those young players in the secondary don't develop the Giants will have difficulty covering people. Oh, and if they can't win some games at home this season. The Giants went 7-1 on the road in the regular season, but only 3-5 at home. They can't count on being so efficient on the road, so they have to win more often in the Meadowlands.



What team in the NFC has the best shot at keeping an NFC East team out of the Super Bowl?

BBV: The popular answer to that question these days is the Minnesota Vikings. But, I'm not buying that with Tarvaris Jackson at quarterback. With Brett Favre, maybe, but not with Jackson. I don't believe in Gree Bay with Aaron Rodgers, either. I guess that leaves Seattle.



Give me one player on your team everyone else might not know about, but who could wind up making a name for himself this season.

BBV: Watch out for No. 1 pick Kenny Phillips. This guy is a heavy-hitting, play-making safety and if he isn't starting Week 1 he will force his way into the lineup shortly thereafter.



Rank the starting quarterbacks within the division.

BBV: Tony Romo
Eli Manning
Donovan McNabb
Jason Campbell

Giants fans will be mad at me for taking Romo here, so I need to qualify this answer. I don't think you can argue with the numbers that say Romo has been better game-in and game-out. As a Giants fan, though, would I trade Eli straight up to get Romo? Not a chance. Eli has proven that he is a winner. Romo has nice numbers and a celebrity girlfriend, but he hasn't proven that he can come up big when it matters most. Eli has, and I'll take that every time.



Rank the coaches within the division.

BBV: Tom Coughlin. I think there is little doubt he is, right now, top dog among coaches in the division. That's pretty amazing, but I think really hard to argue with.
Andy Reid.
Wade Phillips
Jim Zorn



Finally, what is your predicted order of finish in the NFC East? Why?

BBV: Giants
Cowboys
Redskins
Eagles

The Giants are defending Super Bowl champions. I say they are the favorites until someone knocks them off. I still think it's 50-50 on the Cowboys. They could win the whole enchilada, but they could also completely implode with that volatile roster and a lame-duck head coach and miss the playoffs entirely. I almost picked Dallas for last in this division, because I think an implosion of some sort in inevitable, but I couldn't bring myself to do it. The Redskins have talent, but they have a question mark at head coach. The Eagles are tough to figure. I just don't know about Andy Reid anymore, and McNabb's health is always a question.

Muchas gracias amigo. As always, make sure you pepper this thread with your own comments on BBV's answers. Even better, give your own short (or long, preferably long!) answers to the 10 questions above.

[Note by TexSkins, 05/12/08 2:57 PM CDT ] Skin Patrol types faster and writes better.

As part of the plan to create sports news (specifically NFL news) when there is none to feed to global machine that is ESPN, the Mouse Ear NFL Division has released the first (of many) versions of the NFL Power Rankings.

There are some interesting things here. First, the top NFC team in May is the NFL Champion New York (football) Giants the Dallas Cowboys? Wait... you're telling me that the team that won the Super Bowl and has only added pieces is not only the second best team in their conference, they're the second best team in their division? Is it because TO is now a TV Star? Or is it because Romo butchered "Take Me Out to the Ballgame" at Wrigley worse than Harry Carey ever did? I mean, it has to be something like that, since it can't be on the field where the Giants won... in Dallas... in the playoffs... before winning the Super Bowl.

I mean, I can understand having the Patriots, Colts and even the Chargers ahead of the Giants. I don't like it, but I can understand it. But I think you almost have to have the Super Bowl champs in the top 5 in May, don't you?

From the ESPN article:

Our voters, who also include staff writer John Clayton and Scouts Inc. Insiders Jeremy Green and Keith Kidd, had diverse takes on what offseason moves mean to various teams. The Titans ranked as high as 10th in one voter's opinion, but rated only 22nd in another's. The defending champion Giants are the best team in the league, according to one selector; another ranks nine teams ahead of Big Blue.

Now, on to your Washington Redskins, who are 14th... one behind the Eagles in May. As Matt Mosley, one of many Dallas Cowsheep transplanted in Bristol even though he still lives in Dallas who wrote the blurbs for the NFC East puts it:

Too many questions: a new coach, young QB and a pair of rookie WRs. Hard to get a good read. (MM)

And by "hard to get a good read" he means last place in the NFC East in May. They are ahead of some playoff teams (Bucs, Titans) and in e top half of the rankings... but not by much: the Bucs are #15 (end of the top half) and the Titans are #16. So, basically, this means the football experts in May have the Reskins at, what? 8-8, 7-9? They don't specifically put a record down... but to finish last in your division and to be the 14th best team, and 8th in the NFC, means you are about middle of the pack.

I don't specifically disagree with the 14th overall ranking and predicition a 4th place NFC East finish in May for the Redskins, but I do have a problem with almost all of the rankings... from about #4 down. But that's it for now. What says ye?