Hi all:
RECOMMENDED PICKS
Bucs (+9) @ Rams, o/u 46?, 9:05 p.m. EST
Pick: Rams and under
Those who remember the past are doomed to believe it. At least that's what's going on here tonight. The last two seasons Tampa Bay gave the juggernaut Rams as much as they could handle, barely losing in St. Louis in the NFC Championship Game two seasons ago, 11-6, and then topping the Rams on a Monday Night Football finale last year, 38-35. So in their Super Bowl season, Tampa Bay held the Rams to their lowest point total of the season and last year, the Bucs beat the Rams at their own game. The Bucs have also started slowly the last couple of years before making a run at the end of the season.
Now, I take a different mindset when it comes to Monday Night Football. It's the Lemming Bowl, when everyone comes out of the woodwork and follows what they hear in the first five minutes of ESPN SportsCenter or reads on the front page of USA TODAY. The casual observer won't believe that Tampa Bay is a shadow of its former self. Warren Sapp, Keyshawn Johnson, Brad Johnson, Warrick Dunn, Mike Alstott, and John Lynch get a lot of press, and they continue to yap, so the Bucs must still be very good. This is a team with Super Bowl aspirations, a team that was right in the hunt the last few years, a team that has given St. Louis everything it could handle the last two seasons. Tampa Bay could not have dropped off that much in just a season, could it?
Uh, yes.
Sports mediums are not designed to inform you of anything. They are designed to get you to watch the game. They are designed to get you to buy the newspaper. They are designed to sell advertising. Is ESPN's SportsCenter, owned by the same company that owns ABC (and therefore Monday Night Football) going to tell you that Tampa Bay stinks, is falling apart at the seams, and will see its season ruined tonight because St. Louis is so much better than the Bucs? Not a chance, because they you won't watch the game.
These stories can be sold on the general public who doesn't look into the facts. But here's the truth:
* Tampa Bay's great defense? Gone. The Bucs are allowing 18.1 ppg, which doesn't sound so bad. But their foes have averaged 19.84 ppg in all games combined, so what's so great about holding them to a point less?
* Last year, the Bucs scored 24.2 ppg and gave up 16.8 ppg. This year the numbers have fallen to 20.3 ppg scored and 18.1 ppg allowed. When the numbers drop both offensively and defensively, that's not a good sign.
* The Rams actually have a BETTER defense than Tampa Bay. Only New Orleans has scored more than its average against the Rams this season, and that's become a bitter division rival. St. Louis is allowing just 16.2 ppg, which looks even better when you conisder that its foes are averaging 20.96 ppg overall.
We can play up that Tampa Bay REALLY NEEDS to win this game, or it will be finished. Tony Dungy will be out of a job. Warren Sapp might get shipped out. Of course, we heard all that before last week's home loss to Chicago. We keep hearing it before Tennessee Titans games, too. Apparently no one can accept the fact that these teams have simply fallen off this year. Then when they are officially eliminated, everyone expresses shock.
However, we don't win at handicapping by expressing shock. We win by anticipating actions. And here's the action -- Tampa Bay is finished and the Rams are just getting started. St. Louis has been held under 31 points just once in its four home games this season. Tampa Bay has won just two of its last four games, one against winless Detroit and one against the folders from Minnesota.
The Rams will pound Tampa Bay's once proud defense. The only worry is that the Rams' defense is getting a little banged up and might be too leaky to keep Tampa Bay from scoring its requisite two TDs. The four worst losses of the Tony Dungy era in Tampa Bay are 27-0 to Detroit on 9/29/96, 24-0 to Carolina on 12/1/96, 31-0 to the Jets on 12/14/97, and 45-0 to the Raiders on 12/19/99. Tonight's game will join that ignominious list -- St. Louis 33, Tampa Bay 6.
Good luck,
Mike
RECOMMENDED PICKS
Bucs (+9) @ Rams, o/u 46?, 9:05 p.m. EST
Pick: Rams and under
Those who remember the past are doomed to believe it. At least that's what's going on here tonight. The last two seasons Tampa Bay gave the juggernaut Rams as much as they could handle, barely losing in St. Louis in the NFC Championship Game two seasons ago, 11-6, and then topping the Rams on a Monday Night Football finale last year, 38-35. So in their Super Bowl season, Tampa Bay held the Rams to their lowest point total of the season and last year, the Bucs beat the Rams at their own game. The Bucs have also started slowly the last couple of years before making a run at the end of the season.
Now, I take a different mindset when it comes to Monday Night Football. It's the Lemming Bowl, when everyone comes out of the woodwork and follows what they hear in the first five minutes of ESPN SportsCenter or reads on the front page of USA TODAY. The casual observer won't believe that Tampa Bay is a shadow of its former self. Warren Sapp, Keyshawn Johnson, Brad Johnson, Warrick Dunn, Mike Alstott, and John Lynch get a lot of press, and they continue to yap, so the Bucs must still be very good. This is a team with Super Bowl aspirations, a team that was right in the hunt the last few years, a team that has given St. Louis everything it could handle the last two seasons. Tampa Bay could not have dropped off that much in just a season, could it?
Uh, yes.
Sports mediums are not designed to inform you of anything. They are designed to get you to watch the game. They are designed to get you to buy the newspaper. They are designed to sell advertising. Is ESPN's SportsCenter, owned by the same company that owns ABC (and therefore Monday Night Football) going to tell you that Tampa Bay stinks, is falling apart at the seams, and will see its season ruined tonight because St. Louis is so much better than the Bucs? Not a chance, because they you won't watch the game.
These stories can be sold on the general public who doesn't look into the facts. But here's the truth:
* Tampa Bay's great defense? Gone. The Bucs are allowing 18.1 ppg, which doesn't sound so bad. But their foes have averaged 19.84 ppg in all games combined, so what's so great about holding them to a point less?
* Last year, the Bucs scored 24.2 ppg and gave up 16.8 ppg. This year the numbers have fallen to 20.3 ppg scored and 18.1 ppg allowed. When the numbers drop both offensively and defensively, that's not a good sign.
* The Rams actually have a BETTER defense than Tampa Bay. Only New Orleans has scored more than its average against the Rams this season, and that's become a bitter division rival. St. Louis is allowing just 16.2 ppg, which looks even better when you conisder that its foes are averaging 20.96 ppg overall.
We can play up that Tampa Bay REALLY NEEDS to win this game, or it will be finished. Tony Dungy will be out of a job. Warren Sapp might get shipped out. Of course, we heard all that before last week's home loss to Chicago. We keep hearing it before Tennessee Titans games, too. Apparently no one can accept the fact that these teams have simply fallen off this year. Then when they are officially eliminated, everyone expresses shock.
However, we don't win at handicapping by expressing shock. We win by anticipating actions. And here's the action -- Tampa Bay is finished and the Rams are just getting started. St. Louis has been held under 31 points just once in its four home games this season. Tampa Bay has won just two of its last four games, one against winless Detroit and one against the folders from Minnesota.
The Rams will pound Tampa Bay's once proud defense. The only worry is that the Rams' defense is getting a little banged up and might be too leaky to keep Tampa Bay from scoring its requisite two TDs. The four worst losses of the Tony Dungy era in Tampa Bay are 27-0 to Detroit on 9/29/96, 24-0 to Carolina on 12/1/96, 31-0 to the Jets on 12/14/97, and 45-0 to the Raiders on 12/19/99. Tonight's game will join that ignominious list -- St. Louis 33, Tampa Bay 6.
Good luck,
Mike
