00:00:00
Welcome to Wharton Moneyball. Welcome to
00:00:02
a full hour of sports analytics here on
00:00:05
the Wharton podcast network. This is
00:00:08
Kate Massie hosting this week with most
00:00:10
of the crew. We have Eric Bradow in
00:00:12
here. We have Audi Winer in here. Our
00:00:14
fourth co-host Shane Jensen is out and
00:00:16
about doing Shane Jensen things. He'll
00:00:17
be back. Some combination of us are here
00:00:21
almost every week of the year and have
00:00:22
been for going on what is it 11 and a
00:00:26
half years now. Well over 10 years now.
00:00:29
This is a time of year where everything
00:00:31
we love is going on. We've got baseball
00:00:33
warming up. We've got pro football
00:00:36
kicking off and we've got college
00:00:38
football off the ground. Things have
00:00:40
happened. There are things to talk
00:00:42
about, real football to talk about, real
00:00:43
things to react to. We're going to
00:00:46
follow our typical format this week.
00:00:48
We're going to have a guest in here for
00:00:49
the first half hour and then open up
00:00:51
open open topics for the second half
00:00:54
hour. our guest. Well, it's college
00:00:56
football time, so one of our regular
00:00:58
college football guests and one of our
00:00:59
favorite all-time guests, Stephen
00:01:01
Godfrey, is here. Stephen's been gracing
00:01:04
us for years now. Stephen is the co-host
00:01:07
of the FA Phantom Island podcast. He is
00:01:10
co-host of Yahoo Sports College football
00:01:13
podcast called The Inquirer, I believe,
00:01:16
along with Andy Staples and Ross Dinger.
00:01:19
And he's a columnist at the Washington
00:01:21
Post. Stephen has been at the center of
00:01:24
college football dialogue for a long
00:01:26
time now and it's always fun to talk to
00:01:28
him. Stephen, thanks for making time for
00:01:30
us, man. Appreciate it.
00:01:31
>> Thanks for having me, guys. I'm very
00:01:33
excited to um add nothing to
00:01:35
mathematical conversation whatsoever.
00:01:37
>> Well, I feel like you've always indulged
00:01:39
us. Well, you've
00:01:40
>> I feel like I make that joke every time
00:01:41
I come on.
00:01:42
>> Well, somehow you keep coming back,
00:01:44
though. We appreciate that. I think not
00:01:45
all journalists are interested in
00:01:47
talking with a bunch of data data geeks.
00:01:49
>> Oh, no. Oh, I mean that's kind of how I
00:01:51
got my podcasting start with Bill
00:01:52
Connelly. So, I mean I Yeah, I'm used to
00:01:54
it. It's a little bit like interpreting
00:01:56
one of your friends at a dinner party to
00:01:58
a to another friend who doesn't work in
00:02:00
that field.
00:02:01
>> That's kind of what journalism should
00:02:02
be. If if we want to get if we want to
00:02:04
get a little existential for a second to
00:02:07
take trying to translate someone's
00:02:08
expertise into layman terms for other
00:02:10
people to absorb it. That's basically
00:02:12
all
00:02:13
>> that's great.
00:02:14
>> Yeah. It's just it's it's divisive
00:02:16
communication. That's all. I can I let
00:02:18
me just jump in there Stephen for a
00:02:19
second because you know um you know for
00:02:22
20 years I've been running various forms
00:02:24
of centers here at Wharton on analytics
00:02:26
and AI and machine learning and I agree
00:02:28
with you one of the biggest challenges
00:02:30
we have what we have a shortage of in my
00:02:32
view tremendously in the business world
00:02:34
etc is people that can do that
00:02:36
translation so I cannot just I cannot
00:02:38
agree with you more it's the hardest
00:02:40
thing I can tell me as an academic maybe
00:02:42
K naughty feel differently is
00:02:44
translating the work that I do which can
00:02:46
be technical
00:02:47
but to a very broad audience and and not
00:02:49
but not to a level that doesn't mean
00:02:51
it's meaningful. It's really hard. So I
00:02:54
can just tell you for myself as part of
00:02:55
Wharton Moneyball, we're appreciative of
00:02:57
the work you do.
00:02:58
>> No, I love coming on. This is and
00:03:00
usually we we end up in a dialogue
00:03:01
that's a lot further along than than the
00:03:03
typical sort of sports radio tropes, if
00:03:06
you will. So, but we can do those too if
00:03:08
you want. I mean, we can talk about
00:03:09
Texas.
00:03:10
>> You know that I'm going to want to. Um
00:03:12
it does strike me though at the risk of
00:03:14
propping you up too much. it.
00:03:16
>> No, no, not not that.
00:03:17
>> Well, hold on. No, I'm I want to do
00:03:18
that, but first I want to say one other
00:03:20
thing. Um, it's possible that your
00:03:22
conversations, your podcast with Connley
00:03:24
helped advance the whole analytics
00:03:26
conversation. I mean, Bill's on, you
00:03:28
know, Bill's in the center of things
00:03:30
now. Everybody refers to his work now.
00:03:32
And you and him, you were like, you were
00:03:35
like proof of concept that he could have
00:03:37
a meaningful college football
00:03:39
conversation with a regular football
00:03:40
guy. And it was it was a wonderful
00:03:43
podcast. But I bet it I bet it did make
00:03:45
a difference, Stephen. I bet that was a
00:03:46
contribution to the whole analytics
00:03:48
movement in the last whatever 10 or 12
00:03:50
years.
00:03:51
>> Yeah. But no, Bill and I kind of tapped
00:03:53
into something which is that a lot of
00:03:55
people want to learn more about the
00:03:58
sport. A lot of people have, let's call
00:04:00
it, groundbreaking data or things that
00:04:02
they've worked on. And so if you can
00:04:04
just work on translating that, what we
00:04:06
found, and Bill Connley is now at ESPN,
00:04:08
by the way, and he's great at what he
00:04:10
does. uh when he first developed what he
00:04:13
used to call the S&P plus metric system,
00:04:14
now it's the SP plus metric system. He
00:04:17
um I think he had a hard time getting in
00:04:19
the door with coaches, with media, with
00:04:21
people to understand its intrinsic
00:04:23
value. But if you sit down and you
00:04:25
really kind of walk it out in layman's
00:04:26
terms, I think there are very I think if
00:04:28
anybody's listening who's a quant or you
00:04:30
know I don't know if that's a I don't
00:04:32
know if that's a pjorative or not.
00:04:33
That's what we call them in the media.
00:04:34
That's what we call pull ourselves. We
00:04:36
call ourselves that.
00:04:37
>> Okay. In the sports media world, we just
00:04:38
say, "Hey, you know, ask a quant."
00:04:42
I there's a there's a it's all about the
00:04:45
translation. Like I I think people do
00:04:47
really want for what advanced statistics
00:04:51
and advanced analytics can provide. I
00:04:53
think it's just sometimes it get you
00:04:54
lose the forest for the trees a little
00:04:56
bit. I do think we and maybe maybe y'all
00:04:58
can provide anecdotes that push back on
00:05:00
this, but in my corner of the world, it
00:05:03
seems like we've crossed some sort of
00:05:05
Rubicon where you don't have the
00:05:07
traditional redneck football coach
00:05:09
pushing back the way that we used to or
00:05:10
just saying, "Hey, that's a bunch of
00:05:12
nonsense." If anything, I think, you
00:05:14
know, well, first off, I think the
00:05:15
median age of decision-making coaches,
00:05:17
be it coordinator or head coach, just
00:05:19
decision makers in general, is going
00:05:20
down. I think they're embracing outside
00:05:22
thought. And I think I think being
00:05:24
counterintuitive has provided really,
00:05:26
you know, good results for a lot of
00:05:28
them. So I don't think there's this
00:05:29
hesitancy, you know, just to go to some
00:05:31
of these coaching conventions and and a
00:05:32
lot of those guys have rolled their eyes
00:05:33
in the past. I think they're I think
00:05:35
they're most of them are embracing it.
00:05:36
There are still a few communions amongst
00:05:38
us, but I think that's helped a lot. I
00:05:41
think fans have responded in kind as
00:05:42
well.
00:05:43
>> Is the embrace a result of proven
00:05:47
success? And if that's and because
00:05:49
that's usually how would happen like in
00:05:50
baseball
00:05:51
>> teams were doing it were winning and you
00:05:53
just couldn't ignore it anymore. Um but
00:05:56
there was a couple of principles that
00:06:00
just people just changed their minds on
00:06:02
and the and now they're embracing it in
00:06:04
football. Is there any it's is there
00:06:07
anything you could point to? Would it be
00:06:08
fourth down decision-m or
00:06:10
>> Yeah, that's the first place I'd go
00:06:11
actually is is I'll give you a great
00:06:13
example. Week zero was uh Kansas State
00:06:16
and Iowa State in Ireland, the the sort
00:06:18
of like faux kickoff game or what have
00:06:20
you. Fairly traditional offenses, which
00:06:24
is a big broad term to use, but a fairly
00:06:26
traditional offense on both sides of the
00:06:27
law, especially with M. Campbell. Pretty
00:06:29
conservative, almost sort of like
00:06:31
redundant in his decision-m with his
00:06:33
offense, right? There was a lot of
00:06:36
fourth down,
00:06:38
I guess, like adventurous decision-
00:06:39
making you could call it. There was a
00:06:41
lot of we're going to go for it in
00:06:42
certain situations that
00:06:44
The thing that struck me was that it no
00:06:46
one talked about it. Five years ago, we
00:06:49
there would have been two or three think
00:06:51
pieces going into week one about did you
00:06:54
can you believe that Matt Campbell did
00:06:55
this? Can you believe he absorbed this
00:06:57
amount of risk? I think it's become
00:06:59
common place in the industry even
00:07:01
amongst coaches who are again not really
00:07:04
who don't really embrace what y'all do
00:07:06
to be more aggressive on fourth down
00:07:08
because the numbers have susted it out.
00:07:10
I I I think they believe in the numbers.
00:07:12
That's probably the best example that I
00:07:14
can think of off the top of my head.
00:07:15
There's some there are some other ones
00:07:16
definitely,
00:07:17
>> but are they the are they the easy cases
00:07:19
or are they generally moved on to the
00:07:20
hard ones? So the easy cases are the
00:07:22
fourth and ones in the red zone that
00:07:24
used to be field goals and now they're
00:07:25
going for it almost exclusively. But
00:07:28
maybe the harder cases are those still
00:07:30
are those would those uh raise some
00:07:32
eyebrows if you decided for example it's
00:07:35
fourth and one in your own territory 35
00:07:38
yard line.
00:07:38
>> Sure. that's and the and the and the
00:07:41
right play is to go for it. Would that
00:07:43
be something that they would embrace or
00:07:44
they still saying no way?
00:07:45
>> Uh maybe some of the triple option teams
00:07:48
like you know fourth and one they might
00:07:49
feel good about it. But um you know what
00:07:51
one of the things one of the things that
00:07:53
has spurred along let's call it
00:07:55
adventurous decision- making in fourth
00:07:57
down is that the average IQ of the fan
00:08:00
has increased. I'm not taking credit for
00:08:02
that with PAPN or anything else, but we
00:08:03
brought quant we brought quant in and we
00:08:06
said, hey, this is why or hey, you know,
00:08:08
once you're once you're across the
00:08:10
opponent's 45, you need to go for it all
00:08:12
the time. Remember, Iowa was really
00:08:14
popular for a long time, guys. That Iowa
00:08:16
philosophy of like, you know, they're
00:08:17
punting on the opponent's 19. I feel
00:08:19
like, you know, up until a couple years
00:08:20
ago, and that was like how we that
00:08:23
that's, you know, that conservatism
00:08:25
ruled college football. I think there's
00:08:27
outside pressure on some of these
00:08:29
coaches throughout a very long offseason
00:08:31
to ask those questions and say, "Hey,
00:08:33
you know, up on hey guys, on the TV,
00:08:35
some booster is going to go up to that
00:08:36
head coach and say, hey, on the TV it
00:08:38
said you guys had x amount of
00:08:39
probability of a success rate on going
00:08:41
for it on fourth down. Why didn't you?"
00:08:43
So, I think that because advanced
00:08:45
analytics has risen to the level it has,
00:08:48
I think that coaches have to account for
00:08:50
when the math says to do something and
00:08:52
they choose against it. There needs to
00:08:54
be a concrete example of why they didn't
00:08:57
do it. Was it a personnel issue? Was
00:08:59
there an injury? What was going on?
00:09:03
>> So, Stephen, let me ask you just a quick
00:09:04
question. It's also relates to how do
00:09:07
you decide what to translate? And what I
00:09:09
mean by that is let's take this week in
00:09:11
college football. Obviously, there was,
00:09:14
you know, Ohio State beating Texas, but
00:09:16
you know, it's not like on a surprising
00:09:18
factor. It's not like that's that
00:09:21
surprising. You had maybe um Alabama
00:09:24
losing, right? That's probably a little
00:09:26
higher on the surprising factor. You
00:09:28
could argue USF blowing out Boise State.
00:09:31
I don't know, maybe that's a little
00:09:32
surprising, but who cares kind of thing,
00:09:34
>> right?
00:09:35
>> How do you think about the intersection
00:09:37
of surprising and interesting to your
00:09:40
readers and and and to when you pick
00:09:43
even like games to comment on or talk
00:09:46
about? So, I'm I'm only I I can't ever
00:09:50
exceed the limits of narrative
00:09:51
structure, which is a fancy way of
00:09:53
saying I have to keep a casual attention
00:09:56
span engaged. I have to find a primary
00:09:58
concept and then I have to find
00:10:01
supporting information. Now, the better
00:10:03
the supporting information, which I've
00:10:05
often found in advanced analytics, the
00:10:07
stronger my argument can be. So, I'm
00:10:09
going to give you a really specific
00:10:10
example of how I used it this weekend.
00:10:13
Sorry, uh apologies in advance. I'm
00:10:15
going to talk about Texas, but I called
00:10:17
up a friend of mine, Parker Fleming. Um,
00:10:20
his he's a stats of war on social media.
00:10:22
Parker um has is an uh industry analyst.
00:10:25
He works as a consultant and adviser to
00:10:27
a lot of different football teams. So,
00:10:30
Parker's a friend of mine and after the
00:10:32
Texas game, I'm going to back up since
00:10:34
we're talking to we're talking to
00:10:36
Wharton, we're talking to some Philly,
00:10:37
right? There is an Eagles playoff game.
00:10:39
So, I'm a lifelong Atlanta Falcons fan,
00:10:41
which might be cause for you guys to, I
00:10:44
don't know, call in some sort of like
00:10:45
social services on me, but I'm a
00:10:48
lifelong Atlanta Falcons fan. There's an
00:10:49
Eagles Falcons playoff game in 2017 that
00:10:53
ends in an truly bizarre play call by
00:10:56
Sarkc, and I trust me, I'm going
00:10:57
somewhere with this. Sarkc was the
00:10:59
offensive coordinator of the Atlanta
00:11:00
Falcons before he went back to the
00:11:01
college ranks and even went back to
00:11:02
Alabama. Um Malcolm Jenkins, the the
00:11:06
Eagle safety at the time said, "We knew
00:11:07
exactly what they were going to do as
00:11:09
soon as they broke the huddle and they
00:11:11
put three allproce on one side of the
00:11:13
field and a fullback lined up in the
00:11:14
flat on them." Is is one of the most
00:11:16
confounding plays. This is goal to go
00:11:18
fourth and goal with the game on the
00:11:19
line. Okay, flash forward to last year.
00:11:23
Actually, flash forward to two years
00:11:24
ago, the Texas Washington playoff game.
00:11:26
And remember how that game ends on
00:11:27
offense. Okay, now flash forward to last
00:11:30
year's playoff game, which is that
00:11:32
really sort of bizarre series of play
00:11:34
calls at the goal line against Ohio
00:11:36
State for Texas. Now, Caleb Downs did
00:11:39
Caleb down things. There are exceptional
00:11:41
physical feats that break math, right?
00:11:43
That you can't account for the
00:11:45
probability of something happening.
00:11:46
However, Sark's decisionmaking,
00:11:50
absolutely mind-blowing in that
00:11:51
situation. So, we saw a little bit of
00:11:54
that again on Saturday. Now, a lot of it
00:11:57
was just they're in a goal to go
00:11:58
situation. They're going to push push.
00:12:00
They can't get there. But there was that
00:12:01
sort of spectre of Sarkc's inability to
00:12:04
call red zone plays in big moments. So,
00:12:07
how do I go from it's a thing we all
00:12:10
feel to actually laying out a narrative
00:12:13
structure for someone to absorb? How do
00:12:15
I take it out of the realm of opinion?
00:12:16
So, I asked Parker specifically after
00:12:18
the game at was it 3:30 on Saturday,
00:12:22
Central time? I said, "Is there any kind
00:12:24
of stat? is there any kind of number
00:12:25
that backs up the sort of LOL shark red
00:12:28
zone meme that we've all been kind of
00:12:29
picking at on social media for last
00:12:31
years. So he comes back about 20 minutes
00:12:33
later and he says yes decisively and he
00:12:36
pulls up this thing called quality drive
00:12:38
rate. Quality drive rate it used to be
00:12:40
called echle apparently in y'all's world
00:12:42
but basically all it really means is
00:12:45
that a quality drive is a drive in which
00:12:48
you have one first down inside the
00:12:49
opponent's 40. And that right there, I
00:12:52
can tell anybody that. I can explain
00:12:54
that on talk radio. I can explain that
00:12:56
at a dinner party. You have one first
00:12:59
down inside the opponent's 40. That's a
00:13:00
quality drive. Okay. Then he gives me a
00:13:03
second stat, which is points per quality
00:13:05
drive. Again, I've still got your
00:13:07
attention. You're the most casual person
00:13:08
in the world. It doesn't matter what
00:13:10
your education level or affinity for
00:13:11
math is. You understand on that quality
00:13:13
drive, did you get points out of it? And
00:13:15
so what we found was that in 2023, that
00:13:18
year they lost to Washington in the
00:13:20
playoffs, they were sixth in the country
00:13:22
in quality uh drive rate. That means
00:13:24
that they were one of the best offenses
00:13:25
in the country. They were 107th in
00:13:28
points per quality drive. That's it. And
00:13:31
that's all. Those numbers suddenly
00:13:33
become very simple and and comstable for
00:13:36
any sports fan to understand. Hey, Stark
00:13:39
is hell on wheel between the 20. He
00:13:42
commands one of the most talented
00:13:44
offenses and he's very creative. But
00:13:46
there is a discernable problem here when
00:13:48
he gets to the red zone. And when I took
00:13:50
that stat and I took it to the Yahoo
00:13:52
show the following day, what we can then
00:13:54
bridge that into is non-traditional
00:13:57
football or more traditional football
00:13:58
talk where Andy Staples or someone else
00:14:00
could say, "Hey, the field shrinks
00:14:02
inside the red zone. They've got this
00:14:03
personnel issue. Maybe they don't have
00:14:05
short yardage. Maybe they're not getting
00:14:07
enough push and doing traditional run
00:14:08
plays." So I just took all the advanced
00:14:10
analytics like I I could not have
00:14:13
provided you quality drive rate from a
00:14:15
mathematics standpoint. But what I did
00:14:17
was I took Parker's work and I turned it
00:14:20
into a single conversation piece. And
00:14:22
now people can go from, hey, I kind of
00:14:24
think Sarkc sucks inside the 20 to math
00:14:27
says you suck inside the 20. And math
00:14:30
tends to not be argued with except in
00:14:32
American politics.
00:14:34
>> Terrific example. Just last week we had
00:14:36
Ralph Russo on and we asked Ralph where
00:14:38
his kind of quant curiosity came from
00:14:42
and he explained that he was first a
00:14:44
baseball fan and he got a kick out of
00:14:46
Bill James. Bill was a phenomenal is a
00:14:49
phenomenal innovator but one of the
00:14:50
things he's probably best at is
00:14:53
simplifying his insights providing real
00:14:55
just
00:14:56
>> direct ways into the bottom line not
00:14:59
this fancy stuff
00:15:00
>> and that's a it's a bit of what you're
00:15:02
talking about there. We love Parker.
00:15:03
We've had Parker on the show. We follow
00:15:05
Parker. But that's a that is a great if
00:15:07
painful it's a painful distillation. You
00:15:09
>> it is
00:15:10
>> some more they raises a different
00:15:12
question for me and that is
00:15:14
>> okay.
00:15:14
>> How often do we see coaches address
00:15:17
their weak spots? I mean it takes so
00:15:19
many different things to be a major
00:15:21
football coach either NFL or NCAA.
00:15:24
So many different. No one's going to be
00:15:26
good at all of them. And so the ones
00:15:27
that last are the ones who somehow
00:15:29
buttress and fill in and complement
00:15:31
their weaknesses.
00:15:33
How often do we see that happen? And I
00:15:35
mean, Sarc has shown a fair bit of
00:15:37
humility. He's been through some
00:15:38
challenging things in life. He does a
00:15:40
lot really well. This seems to be a
00:15:42
weakness of his. How often do we see a
00:15:43
coach willing to address that kind of
00:15:45
weakness?
00:15:46
>> This is what I love about analytics is
00:15:48
that it takes it it essentially divorces
00:15:51
the ego that there there really it takes
00:15:54
away the personality trait. It takes
00:15:55
away the ego. It takes away the
00:15:57
humanity, which is sometimes considered
00:15:58
to be a slight against mathematics. But
00:16:00
in this case, I think my answer is how
00:16:03
close is the adjustment to your
00:16:05
identity?
00:16:07
If you have defensive gaps, NFL,
00:16:10
college, whatever, but you're an
00:16:12
offensive pedigreed head coach, you came
00:16:13
up as an offensive coordinator, you will
00:16:15
correct very quickly and it will involve
00:16:18
firing someone, right? And you'll
00:16:19
replace them and you will corrected for
00:16:21
that. But what I'm talking about with
00:16:23
Sarge specifically, and this isn't a
00:16:26
personal attack, this is just something
00:16:27
again I know I I first noticed this as a
00:16:29
fan. And then and when he got back to
00:16:31
college and really when he got to Texas
00:16:33
and they once they got up to speed and
00:16:35
personnel,
00:16:37
this this tendency reemerged.
00:16:40
But how in the world if you are if
00:16:42
you're Steve Sarkeesian and your
00:16:44
pedigree is play calling specifically to
00:16:46
come out of that Pete Carol tree of
00:16:47
offensive coordinators and then what I'm
00:16:50
talking about is red zone red zone play
00:16:52
calling. I'm talking about something
00:16:53
that's fundamental to your success. Your
00:16:56
adjustment is going to be a lot more
00:16:59
impactful on how you define yourself and
00:17:01
your quality your your worth right as
00:17:04
the executive and the leader of the
00:17:05
program. So, I think it has to do with
00:17:07
how close is it to your identity.
00:17:09
T
00:17:10
>> terrific answer. Another terrific answer
00:17:11
and another depressing answer. Thank you
00:17:13
very much, Stephen. Really appreciate
00:17:14
your contribution.
00:17:15
>> That's what I try. That's what I try to
00:17:16
do.
00:17:18
>> Okay. So, I'm gonna have to ask you a
00:17:19
couple other questions. Um, one just
00:17:22
while we're on Texas, I was in Columbus,
00:17:24
my first time to Columbus, and I'm still
00:17:26
kind of grappling with how to explain
00:17:28
how to even think about the the fan
00:17:30
experience up there. They were finely
00:17:34
behaved. Of course, they won it. It was
00:17:35
a day game, so it's kind of best case.
00:17:37
And I think they're better than they
00:17:38
were 20 years ago. But it was intense.
00:17:41
And it was almost a professionalized
00:17:44
college crowd in some way. And as soon
00:17:47
as the ball was kicked, they went from
00:17:49
being hospitable normal Midwesterns to
00:17:51
being zombies. I mean, it was a really
00:17:54
it was a really interesting experience.
00:17:56
It was there was a professional quality
00:17:58
to it. And I but I say one of the reason
00:18:00
I'm asking you Stephen is because I
00:18:01
haven't I've been to I've been to Kyle
00:18:03
Field against&M against Texas. I've been
00:18:05
to Texas OU many times. I've been in
00:18:07
intense college games but I've not been
00:18:09
to Tuscaloosa. I've not been to Baton
00:18:11
Rouge. And so I don't know what those
00:18:13
things are like. But Ohio I was in
00:18:15
Michigan last year. Those Michigan guys
00:18:17
were so laidback compared to Ohio State.
00:18:20
They both came off national
00:18:21
championships. It just feels like it's
00:18:24
there's a level of intensity one step up
00:18:26
from from what I might have expected.
00:18:28
I'm curious whether that resonates with
00:18:30
anything you know or have experience.
00:18:32
>> Sure. I think I mean I I I think there's
00:18:34
a way to put math to that to be honest.
00:18:36
I think it's a combination of economics,
00:18:38
sociology, and maybe a dash of religion
00:18:42
to be honest because what you're
00:18:43
describing, you just gave me a very
00:18:45
weird cross-section of America, but let
00:18:47
me try and do this really fast. Well,
00:18:49
one, the average Michigan degree holder
00:18:51
and ticket holder inside that building
00:18:53
is probably going to come from a higher
00:18:54
tax bracket, a higher level of
00:18:56
education. What that usually means is um
00:18:59
I learned this from being raised by law
00:19:01
enforcement. Their propensity for
00:19:04
causing an incident is going to be
00:19:05
significantly lower because they have
00:19:07
more to lose. Right? Okay. Ohio State is
00:19:10
much more uh workmanlike blue collar,
00:19:14
right? So you're going to have more
00:19:15
sidewalk alumni as we call them. You
00:19:18
might see that in Alabama. You might see
00:19:19
that in Louisiana State. Also, you're
00:19:21
attending games
00:19:23
that are not traditional rivalries.
00:19:26
Okay. So, what you're what you're
00:19:28
looking what you're experiencing is
00:19:30
almost more of a a curiosity, a meeting.
00:19:33
There is a little bit of formality to
00:19:35
it, right? There's a little bit of like
00:19:36
uh yes,
00:19:37
>> how do I describe it? It's like you're
00:19:39
kind of putting on it's like meeting a
00:19:40
meeting a significant other's parents
00:19:42
for the first time to a degree until the
00:19:44
game starts, right? Because you said
00:19:45
everyone was very hospitable. I
00:19:46
guarantee you they're not hospitable
00:19:48
when they're playing Michigan or Penn
00:19:49
State or M, you know, Michigan State or
00:19:51
something like that. So, when you get to
00:19:53
the South, I I would say that that's
00:19:54
even more pronounced.
00:19:56
Because southerners have a possess and I
00:20:00
wouldn't include Texas in this.
00:20:01
Southerners, southeasterners
00:20:04
possess another economic disadvantage. I
00:20:07
think their identity is polarized to the
00:20:09
rest of the United States. And this one
00:20:11
sport is wrapped up in in sort of their
00:20:14
brand and who they are.
00:20:16
>> They want to represent extremely well to
00:20:18
outsiders until kickoff.
00:20:20
Okay. But again, I think you can trace
00:20:23
all this from from social migration to
00:20:26
to demographics, the individual states.
00:20:28
One of the most some of the most
00:20:30
hospitable environments in college
00:20:31
football are in the poorest places of
00:20:33
the United States.
00:20:35
>> So, you know, solve for that.
00:20:37
>> Terrifically interesting. One of the
00:20:38
benefits of being in the SEC now as a
00:20:40
Texas fan is that there are all these
00:20:42
road trips possible that that used to
00:20:44
not really be. And one of the advantages
00:20:46
of being a little bit older is that you
00:20:48
take the game a little bit less
00:20:49
seriously and you take the experience a
00:20:51
little bit more seriously and um there's
00:20:54
going to be some future trips that will
00:20:55
involve more sociological observations.
00:20:58
All right, Stephen. Uh week one,
00:21:00
>> give us something that you think you did
00:21:02
learn from week one and then give us
00:21:04
something you think is gonna that people
00:21:06
think they've learned right now that you
00:21:08
think by the end of the season will be
00:21:09
wrong.
00:21:10
>> Some truth and some false truth out of
00:21:13
week one.
00:21:14
I thought the the archery action was
00:21:17
ridiculous. Uh this this idea that he
00:21:19
has been overhyped. I think if anything,
00:21:22
I don't know if this has been said
00:21:23
enough, but his camp was very aggressive
00:21:25
in their control as they were with Eli.
00:21:27
I'm the same age as Eli and we were at
00:21:29
Miss at the same time together. So I
00:21:31
remember I you know we had we had the
00:21:33
same social circles.
00:21:35
The Manning family's always been
00:21:36
extremely tactical in how they manage
00:21:41
I say boys those those men as they go
00:21:43
through that process. I think if
00:21:45
anything it's just the media machine and
00:21:47
we kind of build storylines but also
00:21:48
Texas was ranked what number one number
00:21:51
two depending on the poll. I mean he was
00:21:53
going to be the recipient of some hype.
00:21:54
I I think that's been received poorly
00:21:57
because he had a very mediocre game. I
00:22:00
also think it's a very much a work in
00:22:01
progress. We probably should have paid a
00:22:03
Patricia did a very nice job. I think
00:22:05
also they have replaced very well using
00:22:07
the portal and they probably were a
00:22:09
little bit more f further along in
00:22:12
schematic adaption for week one with
00:22:14
that amount of new personnel than we
00:22:16
give them credit for. Um, one trend I'm
00:22:19
noticing and it it's borne out by the
00:22:22
amount of high-profile programs starting
00:22:24
inexperienced quarterbacks. Like I could
00:22:26
rattle them off, but you know, we just
00:22:28
we talked about Ohio State, we talked
00:22:29
about Texas, we talked about Notre Dame.
00:22:31
um you know all through the weekend
00:22:34
really with the exception of LSU Clemson
00:22:36
you didn't have a good you didn't have
00:22:37
experienced quarterback versus
00:22:38
experienced quarterback in the marquee
00:22:40
game. So one of the things I've noticed
00:22:42
is we're seeing a resurgence in
00:22:44
defensive line play when the front seven
00:22:46
looked lethal this weekend. Now some of
00:22:49
that is just the way that it shakes out
00:22:51
this year is that we have a sort of what
00:22:54
feels like a a perpetual pipeline of
00:22:56
defensive talent but we saw much more
00:22:59
aggressive command. I thought I thought
00:23:01
LSU and Clemson especially seemed it was
00:23:04
a little bit of a throwback where we're
00:23:06
blitzing more. We're we're doing exotic
00:23:08
pressure. We're we're moving guys
00:23:10
around. And I think this might be a
00:23:13
broad generalization after week one. I
00:23:15
think the sport schematically has
00:23:17
adapted to the mobile quarterback to
00:23:19
such a degree that they're now
00:23:21
comfortable again flushing them. You
00:23:22
know, that used to be that that was the
00:23:24
death nail 15 and more like 12 years ago
00:23:28
with Manzel, right? with Cam Newton with
00:23:31
what the offenses that were being called
00:23:33
against Sabin's Alabama. Remember middle
00:23:36
linebackers were 260 pounds 12 years
00:23:39
ago. They were big boys, right? And then
00:23:42
all of a sudden those those young agile
00:23:45
uh horizontally inclined, you know, uh
00:23:48
running quarterbacks changed all that. I
00:23:50
think we've adapted to where we're
00:23:51
almost full circle again. And now the
00:23:53
assumption is that every elite
00:23:54
quarterback within reason is going to
00:23:56
have mobility except maybe Carson Beck.
00:23:59
But you are going to still be able to
00:24:02
apply pressure if you can do it in
00:24:04
creative ways. I thought some of the
00:24:05
blitz some of the blitzes I saw called
00:24:07
this weekend sending pressure from weird
00:24:09
gaps, weird places, delays, spies. Uh I
00:24:13
was really impressed by a lot of the
00:24:14
defense I saw. Is that a trend? No. I
00:24:17
think we saw some young quarterbacks,
00:24:18
but I do think the way we're calling
00:24:20
defenses has finally adapted to where
00:24:22
they're comfortable blitzing mobile
00:24:24
quarterback.
00:24:25
>> Got it. Got it. Very interesting. All
00:24:27
right. If which of the three big winners
00:24:30
um we I suppose we could even include
00:24:34
Miami. Let's include Miami. Which of the
00:24:36
four big winners this weekend do you
00:24:38
most believe in?
00:24:40
>> Oh, talk. Let's let's set aside Florida
00:24:42
State. Call them three big winners. So
00:24:44
LSU, Ohio State, and Miami. LSU, Ohio
00:24:47
State, Miami. Who do you most believe in
00:24:49
coming out of?
00:24:50
>> Probably Ohio State has the steadiest
00:24:53
hand.
00:24:55
I think LSU has the highest upside.
00:24:58
because um I another trend I've seen is
00:25:01
that we we see the established program
00:25:04
higher than new DC
00:25:06
disappoints for one year and then when
00:25:08
the personnel actually adjust to what he
00:25:10
wants to call so Blake Baker at LSU I
00:25:13
think you're going to see this with USC
00:25:14
in a couple weeks if you want something
00:25:15
to watch for Deant and Lynn coming over
00:25:17
from UCLA didn't register the way that
00:25:19
people thought it would last year but
00:25:21
it's a personnel deficiency they're
00:25:23
actually not even with the portal
00:25:25
they're not being they're not able to to
00:25:27
to overhaul and renovate as fast as
00:25:29
people are assuming. Uh LSU under Blake
00:25:31
Baker looked completely revitalized. The
00:25:34
the way to tell is Harold Perkins like
00:25:37
he was utilized effectively and he and
00:25:39
you really couldn't say that at all last
00:25:40
year.
00:25:42
>> Stephen, is there any chance maybe a
00:25:43
followup is there any chance the
00:25:45
national champion doesn't come out of
00:25:47
the whatever the SEC or the Big 10? I
00:25:49
mean, I know there's a chance, but I
00:25:51
mean it's not that you just said LSU.
00:25:54
You're obviously happy about OS, Ohio
00:25:56
State, you know. I don't know. What do
00:25:58
you think?
00:25:59
>> Clemson and Miami. Cleans Miami are your
00:26:01
two. If if you're looking for a non- big
00:26:03
two, it's Clemson and Miami. Um if if
00:26:05
I'm throwing dark horses out there, I
00:26:07
would not want to go to Ames Iowa in the
00:26:09
first round. Like I think Iowa State
00:26:11
looks really good. Really good. Now, I
00:26:14
say that before they play Iowa, which
00:26:16
has always been sort of a trap for them,
00:26:17
but um if I had to pick, it would be
00:26:20
those two. and those two. It's because
00:26:22
Clemson finally woke up and joined the
00:26:23
modern era. And you know, you want to
00:26:27
talk about dogma and ideology getting in
00:26:28
the way of numbers.
00:26:30
That's Davos Sweeney. Like
00:26:33
talk about laughing at math. I mean,
00:26:35
that guy, my god, he he he looked fact
00:26:37
in the face and and basically almost
00:26:39
walked away from the game because he was
00:26:41
so resistant to adapt to the personnel
00:26:43
changes and NIL and all that stuff. They
00:26:45
have figured that out in a big way.
00:26:47
Miami. Well,
00:26:49
>> no. Or Oregon. No. No.
00:26:51
>> No. I mean, well, I love Oregon.
00:26:53
Oregon's I picked them to win the
00:26:55
national title, but I mean, they're a
00:26:56
Big 10 team, so
00:26:57
>> don't Yeah. Don't forget Don't forget
00:26:59
they're a Big 10 team.
00:27:00
>> That happened. All right. Whatever.
00:27:02
>> Steen. Yeah. Talking about Clemson one.
00:27:06
It still seems like they could fall off
00:27:09
this year. They haven't proven it yet.
00:27:10
They came in high expectation, but uh
00:27:13
unclear. And when you name those two
00:27:15
teams, I start thinking about
00:27:16
quarterbacks. Beck versus Clutnick. It's
00:27:18
just one week, but man, Beck looked a
00:27:21
lot stronger than Koopnik week one. And
00:27:24
the quarterbacks can make such a big
00:27:25
difference. It would be it would be
00:27:27
fascinating if Miami ends up actually
00:27:28
that much stronger because not not least
00:27:31
because of the quarterback differences.
00:27:33
>> Yeah. Just remember though, that's Mario
00:27:35
Crystal Ball and you want to talk about
00:27:36
analytics and what the numbers tell you.
00:27:38
>> Undoubtedly. Undoubtedly. All right,
00:27:40
last question. We got to get you out of
00:27:41
here. Um, this is a bigger topic for
00:27:43
another conversation, but I thought
00:27:44
about it all summer with the world
00:27:46
changing around NIL. You are, one of the
00:27:49
things you're well known for is your
00:27:50
Bagman article from way back in the day
00:27:52
before it was legal to pay these kids.
00:27:54
There were plenty of schools paying
00:27:56
these kids and you documented in high
00:27:57
journalistic fashion. Um, what's your
00:28:00
opinion? And we've only got a minute
00:28:01
here. It's a longer conversation, but
00:28:03
where where do you think we settle
00:28:05
there? There was this attempt this year
00:28:07
to tighten things down. Let's put a
00:28:09
budget on things. that's not let's let's
00:28:12
make them meet certain criteria before
00:28:14
we approve payments. And there are some
00:28:16
schools that are betting that that's not
00:28:17
going to stick. What is the god-free
00:28:19
opinion on what's equilibrium for the
00:28:22
NCAA in the next few years? Is there
00:28:24
one?
00:28:24
>> Yeah, water water rises to meetups level
00:28:27
and I don't think we're there yet. Um,
00:28:28
but I do think that the
00:28:32
there's going to be a lot of
00:28:32
grandstanding from the political side of
00:28:34
this spectrum to try and act like
00:28:36
they're going to intercede and create
00:28:38
some sort of solution to protect the
00:28:40
sanctity of the sport. That's that's
00:28:41
just as much nonsense and lip service
00:28:44
and pablum as it ever has been. But
00:28:47
I also don't see a a fundamental shift
00:28:50
in the powers, the halves and the have
00:28:52
nots or anything like that. Uh, the
00:28:54
bottom line is that if you can fund one
00:28:55
of these programs, you will. and the
00:28:58
large programs that succeeded before
00:28:59
this change occurred, they're still
00:29:01
going to be successful afterwards as
00:29:03
long as they fund it. I think there's a
00:29:04
couple examples. We talked about
00:29:06
Clemson. They resisted and then they
00:29:08
adjusted. Look at Texas Tech, right?
00:29:11
Look at that. That's a money base that
00:29:13
is responding to the change. You'll have
00:29:16
a couple outliers come in and upset the
00:29:18
order, but this sport is really this
00:29:21
sport punishes usurpers.
00:29:24
they they they they they tend to they
00:29:26
tend to absorb trends into the into the
00:29:30
power uh those with power and so I don't
00:29:33
think a lot is going to change. It's
00:29:35
good that the kids are getting some
00:29:36
money now.
00:29:38
>> Yeah, for sure. For sure. Okay, Stephen,
00:29:42
hope to talk with you more about that
00:29:43
down the road. Thank you for making time
00:29:45
for us. Enjoy this season. It does seem
00:29:47
to be shaping up to be one of the more
00:29:49
open, interesting, unpredictable
00:29:51
seasons. We'll see if it plays out that
00:29:53
way. Thanks guys.
00:29:55
>> Absolutely. Stephen Godfrey, you can
00:29:57
follow him at the Washington Post uh at
00:30:00
Yahoo at the his new podcast and um he's
00:30:05
a co-host on the on the Yahoo Inquirer
00:30:07
podcast with Ross Dinger and Andy
00:30:10
Staples. One of the fun things for some
00:30:12
of us on that podcast is they're all
00:30:13
Southerners. So, you get this trio of
00:30:16
southern accents in there talking
00:30:17
college football. Welcome to the second
00:30:19
half of this week's show. This is Cade
00:30:22
Massie hosting with my longtime co-host,
00:30:24
friends, colleagues, collaborators, Eric
00:30:25
Bradlo and Audi Winer. Shane Jensen will
00:30:28
be back. In fact, we think he's going to
00:30:29
be back soon. Uh we're rolling into the
00:30:32
second half of the show. Open topics,
00:30:33
open lines, what we used to call open
00:30:35
lines. We're recording on Tuesday
00:30:37
afternoon. Show will go up on Wednesday.
00:30:40
Just off the phone, Stephen Godfrey
00:30:42
talking a little college football. Guys,
00:30:44
I know it looks like a sleepy week. Week
00:30:46
two, there's only one matchup of top 25
00:30:49
teams. That's Michigan going into
00:30:52
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma. Almost Oklahoma
00:30:55
City, Norman outside of Oklahoma City.
00:30:57
Five and a half point underdogs. True
00:30:59
freshman Bryce Underwood. Most lauded
00:31:01
freshman in the game. Five and a half
00:31:04
point underdogs. That's a big one. Other
00:31:06
than that, it's a little sleepy. I just
00:31:07
want to point out briefly as we
00:31:09
transition from a conversation of
00:31:10
Godfrey to the rest of the sports world.
00:31:12
There's good under the radar games.
00:31:14
Baylor at SMU. That's an Old Southwest
00:31:16
Conference game. It's also like second
00:31:18
tier Big 12 versus second tier. Possibly
00:31:20
first tier, possibly second tier Big 12
00:31:23
versus same. On the ACC, we've got Iowa,
00:31:26
Iowa State. Iowa State has made some
00:31:28
noise already this year. Iowa always
00:31:32
kind of a annoyance if not contender in
00:31:34
the Big 10. Rivalry game. KU at
00:31:37
Missouri. Another rivalry game. KU
00:31:39
looked terrific in their opening game.
00:31:43
Exciting quarterback. Going a little
00:31:44
further down, what else do we have? UCLA
00:31:47
at UNLV. Sleepy. If you're just up for
00:31:50
entertainment, UCLA was shellacked by
00:31:52
Utah game one. Could they actually lose
00:31:55
another to UNLV? So, there's lots of
00:31:57
below the radar stuff. We got
00:31:59
>> How many of these teams K do you think
00:32:00
might make it to the top 12 that you've
00:32:02
just mentioned?
00:32:04
>> Baylor and SMU for sure. Illinois, I
00:32:07
didn't mention it, going to Duke.
00:32:08
Illinois is in the mix from the Big 10.
00:32:11
Iowa State's a serious contender in the
00:32:13
Big 12. KU is a contender in the Big 12.
00:32:16
Missou's a long shot. KU Missou's a long
00:32:18
shot in SEC. Those are all and then
00:32:22
Michigan know you are both, you know,
00:32:24
off the top tier. They're probably not
00:32:26
going to make it, but either one of them
00:32:27
could shoot up and make it. So, a whole
00:32:30
mix a whole mix of those guys. It's, you
00:32:32
know, it's an appropriate question,
00:32:33
Eric. It's the benefit of the 12 team
00:32:35
playoff. Keeps a lot of teams in
00:32:36
contention. Okay, speaking of that, we
00:32:38
will come to baseball in a minute
00:32:40
because that's exactly what's going on
00:32:41
in baseball. But before we do that, Eric
00:32:43
is going out to Flushing Meadows in just
00:32:45
a few hours. He's going to take in some
00:32:47
quarterfinals. Let's touch base about
00:32:49
the US Open. Both sides of the bracket
00:32:51
are interesting, Eric. You're going to
00:32:52
see a couple of interesting matches
00:32:54
tonight. So, give us an update on the on
00:32:56
the on the US Open.
00:32:59
>> On the men's side, it's starting to
00:33:00
look, you know, even even more
00:33:02
inevitable that it'll be center versus
00:33:04
Alcarez.
00:33:05
sinners on a very easy side of the draw.
00:33:08
I mean, he won today in straight sets.
00:33:09
He has still hasn't lost a set. He's now
00:33:11
into the semi-finals.
00:33:13
He's going to play the winner of Alex
00:33:15
Demanor and Phillix O Aliasim.
00:33:20
I don't think either one of them is
00:33:21
beating Sinner. So, I think uh is
00:33:24
beating S. So, that's fortunate for him.
00:33:29
I'm sorry, beating Alcarez. Uh today's
00:33:31
match, the women's side is where all the
00:33:33
excitement is. I mean, Jess Pagula just
00:33:35
made it to the semi-finals, beat
00:33:37
Kitechova earlier today, but you know, I
00:33:40
I didn't post it, but I could have
00:33:42
posted it at our on our ex account at W
00:33:44
Moneyball. All eight women, I think, had
00:33:47
a chance, and seven out of the eight
00:33:49
remaining women have all won a major
00:33:51
title.
00:33:52
>> Gez. Wow.
00:33:53
>> Remarkable. Compared to the men's where
00:33:55
it's two, it's just Ser and Alcarez.
00:33:58
Djokovic, sorry. Djokovic won a few. Um,
00:34:01
but it's totally different. I I would
00:34:04
put I think most betterers would put 95%
00:34:08
probability on either Ser or Alcarez.
00:34:11
And right now you couldn't pick two
00:34:13
women where you would give more than I'm
00:34:15
not sure you would do much more than
00:34:17
half. Maybe a little bit more than half
00:34:19
for the top two, Sabalinka and Suantech.
00:34:21
I mean it's an interesting stat that
00:34:23
came out. This is my dark horse. What
00:34:25
the hell? I'll pick it now. I'm actually
00:34:26
going to see her tomorrow night. Um, I
00:34:29
know this is meaningless and Audi's
00:34:30
about to frown because it's a small
00:34:32
sample, but Naomi Osaka has never lost a
00:34:36
major where she's made it to the
00:34:38
quarterfinals. So, she's made it to the
00:34:40
quarterfinals. Sorry, AI. It's only four
00:34:43
times in her career, but she's won all
00:34:45
four majors. She's undefeated in the
00:34:47
quarter, semis, and finals of majors.
00:34:49
And so, she absolutely destroyed Koko
00:34:52
Goff yesterday, which is not an easy
00:34:54
thing to do. Uh she's playing Mukaba
00:34:57
tomorrow night. Um and um I'm feeling
00:35:01
really good about Naomi Osaka's game and
00:35:03
when she's on her game, you know, she's
00:35:05
got she's got four hardcore major titles
00:35:08
and I don't see any reason why not. But
00:35:09
just the difference between the men's
00:35:10
and the women's side. Not that the men's
00:35:12
isn't interesting, but like can Djokovic
00:35:15
make it? I mean, let me I'll say the
00:35:17
following. I think I said this last
00:35:18
week. If Djokovic wins this major at age
00:35:21
38, and I just want to repeat who he'd
00:35:23
have to beat to win this in my view,
00:35:26
he's he's playing Taylor Fritz tonight,
00:35:28
the number one ranked American, number
00:35:29
four in the world. If he beats him, he
00:35:32
gets the honor of playing Carlos Alcarez
00:35:34
in the semi-finals. If he beats him, he
00:35:36
gets the honor of playing Yannik Ser in
00:35:38
the finals. If he were to beat Fritz,
00:35:41
Alcarez, and Sinner,
00:35:44
not that there's any doubt he's the
00:35:45
goat, but he's absolutely the goat. I
00:35:48
can't give him more than I mean you
00:35:50
could put any percent you want you know
00:35:52
I don't know 2% there no way he's not
00:35:55
beating all three and physically he
00:35:56
won't you know just physical it's it's
00:35:58
just that he won't be he won't have
00:36:01
enough left in the tank at age 38 to
00:36:04
face even if he makes it to center which
00:36:06
I don't think he will I just don't think
00:36:08
I mean sinner's going to be fresh he's
00:36:10
either way
00:36:11
>> Eric remind us about Osaka um she she
00:36:14
she had she had some mental emotional
00:36:18
struggles. I think some of it came on
00:36:20
the heels of some stuff that happened at
00:36:22
the US Open, if I remember correctly, a
00:36:24
number of years ago. So, my question my
00:36:26
question to you is how recently has she
00:36:27
been back in form? I did I she just kind
00:36:29
of slipped off the radar for a while and
00:36:31
I don't I don't remember when she
00:36:32
reappeared.
00:36:33
>> Well, she's just come back. She had a
00:36:34
child.
00:36:35
>> Okay.
00:36:35
>> Also,
00:36:36
>> okay.
00:36:36
>> And so, um she is ranked. She's 23rd.
00:36:40
She's seated 23rd. So, she's come back
00:36:42
enough. Uh she had two good hardcore
00:36:45
hardcourt results this summer and made
00:36:48
it to the finals of one semi-finals of
00:36:50
another. So she's been playing much much
00:36:53
better. And um again you know it's this
00:36:56
is always hard to say. Did Koko go have
00:36:58
a bad day or did uh you know Osaka have
00:37:02
a really good day? But she just beat the
00:37:04
number three player in the world. I
00:37:06
think the final was either 63 62 or 62
00:37:08
62 and it wasn't close. And if she can
00:37:12
do that to Koko Goff, who's had a very,
00:37:15
very good year, she can do that to
00:37:17
anybody. So, um, but yes, she's been
00:37:20
back playing well for the last two or
00:37:22
three months. And, um, they asked her
00:37:25
on, you know, the broadcaster after her
00:37:28
match against Koko Ga asked her, "How
00:37:30
are you feeling?" And she says, "Well,
00:37:32
you know, I am undefeated in majors when
00:37:33
I make it to the quarterfinals." So, she
00:37:35
obviously knew about that. And so, she
00:37:38
said it with a smile, but she was saying
00:37:39
it somewhat seriously. I don't think I
00:37:41
don't think she thinks she can't win it.
00:37:43
She thinks she can win this.
00:37:45
>> Mhm.
00:37:45
>> And by the way, this is what you have to
00:37:47
put into perspective. If she wins this
00:37:50
match, the major,
00:37:52
he's a year younger than Sabalanka,
00:37:55
who's number one in the world, and
00:37:56
she'll have more majors than Sabalanka.
00:37:58
So, you know, I understand Sabalanka's
00:38:00
great, is the current number one, but if
00:38:02
Koko go wins this, she has five majors
00:38:05
and she'll she's a year younger than
00:38:06
Sabalanka. Why can't we put her at some
00:38:09
point if she wins this in that same
00:38:11
discussion of kind of greatness?
00:38:13
>> Clarification. You just said Koko Goff.
00:38:15
You meant Osaka. Um but
00:38:17
>> Osaka I meant Osaka. Yeah. Osaka. If she
00:38:19
wins, she would have five majors, which
00:38:21
is I think Sabalena has four. They both
00:38:24
have only one on the hard courts. Also,
00:38:27
uh very similar, very similar
00:38:28
accomplished careers and very similar in
00:38:30
age.
00:38:32
>> All right. Well, it's intriguing because
00:38:33
she has been away and this is her first
00:38:35
big one back and she has been through
00:38:36
some life changes. So, it's always
00:38:38
interesting to see whether this is the
00:38:39
same or
00:38:40
>> also have to say quickly, Venus is in
00:38:42
the final eight at doubles at age 45.
00:38:45
So, uh her and Leila Fernandez are
00:38:47
playing together. They had never played
00:38:49
before this tournament. They've beaten
00:38:50
two seated teams already.
00:38:52
They are playing the number one team in
00:38:54
the world uh coming up uh about 4:30
00:38:57
today. So, in about 15 minutes. Um she's
00:39:01
45 and she's in the she's in the
00:39:03
quarterfinals of the doubles. So we'll
00:39:05
we'll see how it goes.
00:39:06
>> All right. Good fun. Um and speaking of
00:39:09
attending events, Odd's going to take in
00:39:11
some Yankees here. Maybe still a week
00:39:13
out, but you've got a Yankees game in
00:39:15
your size. Tigers Yankees, no less.
00:39:18
>> I got two games on the agenda. I'm going
00:39:20
to Fenway on the 18th. I'm going to
00:39:23
Yankee Stadium on the 9th.
00:39:24
>> Why does a Yankee fan attend Fenway
00:39:26
other than he has family in the area?
00:39:28
What else is going on? I uh and that is
00:39:30
uh yeah I'm uh yeah I'm going up to
00:39:32
Fenway to go to visit the Red Sox
00:39:35
because to root against them and and see
00:39:37
the van. We got two games going and uh
00:39:40
>> all right
00:39:40
>> stadium next week.
00:39:41
>> Let's talk about let's talk baseball
00:39:43
then. Um I have a confession to make an
00:39:45
important confession to make. I watched
00:39:47
a little bit of regular season baseball
00:39:50
for the first time I'm going to guess
00:39:52
like three years because
00:39:54
>> and I watched a little bit of uh college
00:39:56
football.
00:39:56
>> Okay. You can see we're pulling each
00:39:58
other a little bit. Well, that's
00:39:59
probably the same reason because there
00:40:00
was college football where there usually
00:40:02
isn't college football, which is Sunday
00:40:03
afternoon, and they snuck the Sunday
00:40:04
night baseball game in there, which was
00:40:06
our Phillies. And I I just want to note
00:40:08
again for those of us who haven't
00:40:10
watched baseball in half a lifetime,
00:40:12
this thing where they talk to players on
00:40:14
the field during live action is
00:40:17
completely insane.
00:40:19
>> I thought it was awesome. I saw I
00:40:21
remember seeing it before the last time
00:40:22
I I I did this, but Harrison Bader, the
00:40:25
Phillies center fielder, was the target
00:40:27
Sunday night and it was it's just crazy
00:40:30
to get that kind of live take. And I do
00:40:32
want to ask one other question. You guys
00:40:33
can help me with this. I would like to
00:40:35
see an example of these cards that the
00:40:37
outfielders, probably all the fielders
00:40:39
do, but especially the outfielders have
00:40:41
for positioning by hitter. And so even
00:40:44
during the interview, he's like he's
00:40:46
he's he's having to like conduct the
00:40:48
interview. who's pulling out the card to
00:40:49
look where he's supposed to be on this
00:40:50
particular batter. I want to see one of
00:40:52
those cards. I want to know what they
00:40:54
say. Just some team, some card. It
00:40:56
doesn't have to actually be a real
00:40:57
thing, so it doesn't have to violate
00:40:59
anything. I'm just curious what those
00:41:00
little cards look like in this day of
00:41:03
advanced positioning based on analytics.
00:41:07
>> Well, I mean, I I've never seen one
00:41:08
myself, but I've talked to the people
00:41:09
who made them. Um, and they know it's uh
00:41:13
it's it's basically positioning for for
00:41:15
each uh player. Uh, but it also helps
00:41:18
them figure out how to orient themselves
00:41:20
because there aren't necessarily
00:41:22
markings, particularly on the in the
00:41:23
away in the on the away games. You have
00:41:26
to figure out how to know where to
00:41:28
stand. That means you have to find a way
00:41:30
to to line yourself up and that's not
00:41:32
that easy. Um, when you're traveling, so
00:41:35
must have some information about that.
00:41:37
When are we going to move to the 21st
00:41:38
century? Why don't look, they already
00:41:40
talked to the pitchers and the things.
00:41:41
Why don't they just have something in
00:41:43
their hat? Hot, hot, hot, cold, cold,
00:41:45
cold.
00:41:46
the old gang start moving left, right,
00:41:48
front, back, or why they just tell you
00:41:50
Audi moved four steps. I'm just saying,
00:41:52
why do they have a paper card? I mean, I
00:41:54
I just don't if we're going to use
00:41:55
technology, let's damn use technology.
00:41:57
Come on.
00:41:58
>> You're talking to the wrong guy. Ai Audi
00:42:00
wants them to not even be able to use a
00:42:02
ballpoint pen. He wants those things
00:42:03
written in pencil. Are you kidding me?
00:42:05
Or charcoal? What do we got? What? How
00:42:07
can we take it down a notch?
00:42:08
>> He believes in the shift.
00:42:11
>> I certainly believe in the shift.
00:42:12
Shift's part of the game. Um the the
00:42:13
thing I'm not I mean I'm tend to be
00:42:16
pretty conservative about the way the
00:42:17
game is played. I don't want to change
00:42:18
the rules. I don't want the golden
00:42:20
atbat. That's the stupidest thing I've
00:42:21
heard um that there's now being talked
00:42:24
about.
00:42:26
>> Yeah, I heard something about that. That
00:42:28
would be pretty darn stupid.
00:42:30
>> So you guys are all about the alltime
00:42:31
stats and it this thing happened last
00:42:34
week. That's right. That that uh that um
00:42:38
jumps out to me because how rare it is.
00:42:39
Schwarber had a four home run game. It
00:42:42
turns out there have been three of them
00:42:43
this year, which is insane because
00:42:45
there's only been 21 ever.
00:42:47
>> Something that has only happened. How
00:42:49
many perfect games? That was always a
00:42:50
gold standard for rarity. How many
00:42:52
perfect games in MLB history have there
00:42:54
been?
00:42:55
>> I think it's right around that mark. I
00:42:56
don't know. Right around that number.
00:42:57
>> I thought it was around 30, but I I
00:42:59
haven't looked.
00:42:59
>> 24. 24.
00:43:01
>> Okay. So, this is about as rare,
00:43:03
slightly more rare
00:43:05
>> than a perfect game.
00:43:06
>> I mean, that's really something. Now,
00:43:08
there is not there is some potentially
00:43:10
non-stationerity, more home runs these
00:43:13
days. I mean, three this year. Why would
00:43:15
it tick up? Why would it tick up? This
00:43:17
thing has happened going into the
00:43:19
season. Happened 18 times ever, 25% less
00:43:22
times than perfect games. I mean, come
00:43:24
on.
00:43:25
>> Well, you could I mean, I I'll use
00:43:27
Audi's theory a couple things. Um, one
00:43:29
is, and you said it, okay, guys are
00:43:31
swinging for home runs more. That's one.
00:43:34
Uh, two, um, it could be that, you know,
00:43:38
they're bringing in, you know, it's back
00:43:39
to the distribution of bad pitchers,
00:43:41
like how many bad pitchers am I going to
00:43:43
bring into this game? Guys aren't aren't
00:43:45
staying in for seven innings, eight
00:43:47
innings. That's another possibility. Or
00:43:49
third, it could just be, you know, we
00:43:51
have to think about this. Maybe three is
00:43:53
not that rare under the, you know, let's
00:43:55
say that the the baseline rate is one
00:43:57
every four to five years. Maybe sampling
00:44:00
from a pluson with that rate maybe. I
00:44:04
mean three is not likely but I I would
00:44:06
think this you know the standard
00:44:08
deviation is what the square root of one
00:44:10
over the rate or something like that. So
00:44:11
I maybe it's so three is rare but it's
00:44:14
not I I could compute if like right now
00:44:16
how many
00:44:18
>> rare things happen all the time. It's my
00:44:20
favorite favorite lines that I teach my
00:44:22
students and that's because there's so
00:44:23
many rare things that can happen and
00:44:24
eventually somebody's going to pack into
00:44:26
one of them. I remember earlier in the
00:44:28
season um and actually at this point in
00:44:30
the season we could do the same
00:44:30
calculation. Yankees center fielder
00:44:32
Trent Gisham has never hit more than a
00:44:35
tiny handful of home runs in a year and
00:44:36
he's at 28
00:44:38
and he was at 15. He was hitting it at a
00:44:41
rate of about one in one in 15 one and
00:44:43
16 when his career rate is like one in
00:44:46
100. And and that was u a really
00:44:49
unlikely event.
00:44:51
And you wonder is it at that point are
00:44:53
you looking at a different hitter or are
00:44:55
you looking at just an unlikely event
00:44:57
happening because they have so many
00:44:59
opportunities? And that's the real rub.
00:45:00
I mean with Schwarber it's just an
00:45:02
interesting thing, right? We know he's a
00:45:03
great hitter. He's got four. Okay,
00:45:04
whatever. But with someone like Trent
00:45:06
Gisham, and this is actually an
00:45:08
interesting question. He's had genuinely
00:45:10
a great season, but would you predict
00:45:12
he'd do it again?
00:45:13
>> Yeah.
00:45:13
>> And my answer is no. I would not predict
00:45:15
he would do it again. Yeah. I don't
00:45:17
think at age whatever he is um
00:45:21
approximately 30, you just you don't
00:45:23
just morph into something that's a
00:45:25
genuine power hitter at center field and
00:45:27
there's going to be this pressure on to
00:45:29
give him a $25 million contract which
00:45:31
would be in my view a mistake based on
00:45:34
the analytics, right? Based on the
00:45:35
numbers that this is um you have to
00:45:37
shrink hard. Use the formula that Eric
00:45:40
has in the back of his board right
00:45:41
there. You have to update that prior
00:45:43
probability, but not that much because I
00:45:46
I'm sticking with that prior. He's got
00:45:48
years. It's not like he's just years of
00:45:51
of mediocrity and and uh I'm not going
00:45:54
to I'm not going to put too much
00:45:56
emphasis on this this one season.
00:45:58
Although I've been thankful to see him
00:46:00
hit and bring the Yankees, you know,
00:46:02
they we've won they won every game but
00:46:03
yesterday since we last recorded. That's
00:46:05
it.
00:46:05
>> Well, the other Yeah. The other thing
00:46:07
that I found uh this, you know, speaking
00:46:09
about baseball just quickly is the guy
00:46:11
that snuck up on me, maybe you guys have
00:46:13
been paying more attention, but you
00:46:15
know, this is why they play 162. When we
00:46:17
look back at the stats, get the
00:46:18
trajectory, and we look at Juan Sto's
00:46:20
year, all of a sudden, you know, there
00:46:23
he is. You know, there he is. He's going
00:46:25
to be at 40 plus, 100 plus. His OPS is
00:46:29
above zero is above 900 and he's got a
00:46:31
war right now of 5.3. So, you know, for
00:46:35
a bad year, that's not a bad year.
00:46:38
>> And a bad start. He ended up quite
00:46:40
excellent. Listen, it it's it breaks our
00:46:43
heart because we know that he's he was
00:46:45
so important to the Yankees last year.
00:46:47
Um,
00:46:48
>> so he could hitter. He could have
00:46:50
stayed, went across town. Such a
00:46:52
violation.
00:46:53
>> Give us something from the last month of
00:46:55
the year, last month of the of the
00:46:58
regular season that y'all are most
00:46:59
interested in that doesn't have anything
00:47:01
to do with the Yankees. like give give
00:47:02
each of you give us one storyline or
00:47:04
question you have for the last month of
00:47:05
the regular season.
00:47:07
>> Well, I'm looking at Kyle Riley. Um
00:47:10
nothing new to the Yankees, but um is he
00:47:13
going to is how close is he going to
00:47:15
flirt with 60? I mean, he's at 50 now. I
00:47:17
think there are 25 games remaining
00:47:20
roughly approximately 10 home runs in a
00:47:22
in a month would be an would be a a
00:47:24
excellent month. It's what he's averaged
00:47:26
this season, but nevertheless, it is
00:47:28
excellent. Um, so really interested in
00:47:30
seeing what he does there. And I'm
00:47:31
actually interested to see whether he
00:47:32
gets the MVP not
00:47:34
>> doing that at catcher is extraordinary.
00:47:36
And this is something that I
00:47:37
analytically have been toying with for
00:47:39
years. I feel like the the position
00:47:41
adjustments that we make in war is is a
00:47:46
uh a big patchwork of guessing. And a
00:47:49
lot of that guesswork is is something
00:47:50
that we don't really know how to deal
00:47:52
with with catcher because you just don't
00:47:54
get that kind of production out of
00:47:56
catcher. You don't get half that
00:47:57
production out of catcher at the number
00:48:00
two catcher. Let's I mean this is
00:48:01
something to quickly look up. Who is the
00:48:03
second most productive catcher in the
00:48:05
American League and you can throw out a
00:48:07
major league and is that catcher half of
00:48:10
Cal Riley? Don't you look at War because
00:48:11
that's an adjustment. But I'm looking at
00:48:12
the the batting productivity.
00:48:15
>> I mean is I I doesn't I have to talk
00:48:18
about the Yankees Dragon. Doesn't Ben
00:48:19
Rice play catcher for us?
00:48:21
>> Yes, but just a little bit.
00:48:23
>> Oh, okay. because he's his productivity
00:48:25
could be half of Raleigh's,
00:48:26
>> right? Half and he's just the backup.
00:48:28
And talk I mean Ben Rice is actually
00:48:29
interesting. Here we are talking about
00:48:31
Yankee again. You did it.
00:48:32
>> I tried. I tried.
00:48:33
>> Ben is interesting guy because uh I did
00:48:35
some numbers analysis on Ben.
00:48:37
>> Ben Rice has the biggest, if not the
00:48:40
biggest, maybe it's the second, but I
00:48:41
think it is the biggest gap between what
00:48:43
what we call the XWOBA and the WOBA. So
00:48:46
the WOBA is a weighted on base
00:48:47
percentage. Just just a single aggregate
00:48:49
offensive number. You can put a plus
00:48:51
sign on it to adjust for your the park,
00:48:53
but it's hardly that relevant. And XOBA
00:48:57
takes the velocity off the bat and the
00:49:00
angle and it turns that into an
00:49:02
estimated
00:49:04
quality. Wobba that you would have if
00:49:08
the what they typically think of the
00:49:10
average amount of luck.
00:49:11
>> So X stands for expected basically based
00:49:14
on the fundamentals or the peripherals,
00:49:16
whatever you want to call it in the
00:49:17
sport. based on the fundamentals, you'd
00:49:19
expect a certain WOBA. And you're saying
00:49:21
his actual WOBA is outperforming his
00:49:23
expected
00:49:24
>> way. It's not even close. It's like he's
00:49:26
his his expected WOBA is something over
00:49:29
nearly 400, which is league leading
00:49:31
territory. And his actual WOBA is in the
00:49:33
low 300, which is average. And it is a
00:49:36
complete gap. And turns out he did it
00:49:38
again last year. Now, last year was only
00:49:40
2024 where he only had a handful. You
00:49:42
know, he didn't have a complete season.
00:49:44
So, it was somewhat thought that he
00:49:46
would break out. Um, and in some level
00:49:48
he has broken out. He's he's had a
00:49:50
pretty good season, but not a great
00:49:52
season. But his ex-wa suggests he's the
00:49:55
third or fourth best hitter in the
00:49:56
league.
00:49:56
>> Okay. Do you do you believe do you
00:49:58
believe in X WOBA?
00:49:59
>> Well, traditionally I have, but now I'm
00:50:02
coming to be suspicious.
00:50:04
All right. All right, guys. Um, let us
00:50:07
change to uh maybe the last sport of the
00:50:10
weekend. This is week one of the NFL. We
00:50:13
have an NFL guest slated for next week.
00:50:16
Brian Burke, our longtime friend, ESPN
00:50:18
analyst, innovator Brian Burke will be
00:50:21
with us to talk about week one, but
00:50:22
between now and then, we have got a lot
00:50:24
of games. We've got 16 games in the
00:50:26
queue and they run all weekend long.
00:50:28
They run Thursday night
00:50:30
>> or Thursday. I'll be I'll be there on
00:50:31
Thursday.
00:50:32
>> So, we'll talk about that in a minute,
00:50:33
but we've got games on Friday and
00:50:35
obviously we have games Sunday and
00:50:36
Monday. So, it's quite the weekend. Um,
00:50:38
we are kicking off with the Eagles.
00:50:42
Dallas in Philadelphia. Eric's talking
00:50:44
about being there. The Cowboys are, I
00:50:46
think, six and a half point dogs coming
00:50:48
in without
00:50:48
>> eight and a half.
00:50:49
>> Eight and a half now. I saw six and a
00:50:50
half today.
00:50:51
>> Eight and a half. I'm just looking. I'm
00:50:53
staring at it, right? Look according to
00:50:54
ESPN bet. I mean, there's all kinds of
00:50:56
lines, but it's eight and a half.
00:50:57
>> If you cross seven, that's a that's a
00:50:58
meaningful thing. So, that's
00:51:00
interesting. Um the Eagles also we can
00:51:02
look at futures for the season and the
00:51:04
Eagles are by far at the top NFC team.
00:51:08
They're right in the mix with the three
00:51:10
strong strongest AFC teams. In fact,
00:51:12
it's kind of interesting that those that
00:51:14
they're all kind of sitting at about the
00:51:16
same ex expectation, the Eagles, Chiefs,
00:51:19
Ravens, and Bills, even though there's
00:51:21
three from the AFC and one from the NFC,
00:51:24
that just speaks to how clearly those
00:51:25
top three in the AFC dominate the the
00:51:27
probabilities coming out of that.
00:51:30
Yeah. No, I agree. I think it's a very,
00:51:32
very interesting season. I just have
00:51:34
this feeling the Chiefs, this isn't the
00:51:38
Chiefs year. Like, you know, around the
00:51:41
edges, they seem, you know, you know,
00:51:44
Travis Kelce is not clearly not the
00:51:46
player he was. And Mahomes actually
00:51:49
didn't have that great a season last
00:51:51
year. I'm not saying he's over the hill.
00:51:52
He's 29 or 30, but I'm just saying he
00:51:54
didn't have, forget the Super Bowl, he
00:51:55
didn't have that great a season last
00:51:57
year. their edge rushers are getting
00:51:59
older. So, and I've got to think I mean
00:52:03
look, Baltimore and Buffalo are
00:52:06
actually, in my view, my view more
00:52:07
talented teams. Eventually, they're
00:52:09
going to beat Kansas City. And I think
00:52:11
if one of them especially gets home
00:52:13
field, that's the key. Don't have to go
00:52:16
to Arrowhead to win the AFC Championship
00:52:19
game. So, if you're Buffalo and
00:52:21
Baltimore, do not lose some random bad
00:52:24
game because you're going to lose some
00:52:26
games to some good teams. Do not lose a
00:52:28
random bad game because that can cost
00:52:30
your home field and that could be end up
00:52:31
being the difference.
00:52:32
>> So I you know Eric I don't know that I
00:52:35
have many stronger sports wishes this
00:52:38
year this calendar year than that Casey
00:52:42
that either Buffalo or Baltimore makes
00:52:44
just give me either one like not Kansas
00:52:45
City by God. I'd rather it not be the
00:52:47
Bengals but I'll take them over the
00:52:49
frigin Chiefs. But really
00:52:50
>> I haven't even looked at schedule
00:52:52
they're playing each other this week.
00:52:53
>> Yeah they open that way Sunday night.
00:52:55
Absolutely. No, I didn't see that. I'm
00:52:57
just looking at I I've been so caught up
00:52:59
on tennis and then I've been caught up
00:53:01
on the Eagles game. I'm looking at the
00:53:03
NFL schedule now. This is an incredible
00:53:06
slate of games.
00:53:06
>> It's a it's a it's a good week one and
00:53:08
it top and you know even Monday night
00:53:10
game is is going to be a good one.
00:53:12
Minnesota, Chicago, but that Sunday
00:53:13
night game, I mean we the last time we
00:53:15
saw Baltimore and Buffalo, last time we
00:53:17
saw
00:53:17
>> Baltimore anyway, they were in Buffalo
00:53:19
for that division game, divisional
00:53:22
playoff game against against Buffalo.
00:53:24
And so this how they ended their season.
00:53:26
Now they're starting their season that
00:53:27
way. Those are two with the highest
00:53:29
expectations. Chargers.
00:53:30
>> Well, this is what I was gonna say.
00:53:31
You're talking about the Chiefs, you
00:53:33
know, the the three-way race for home
00:53:35
field in the AFC, if you want to call it
00:53:38
three three-way race. It begins this
00:53:40
weekend with those two, one of those
00:53:42
teams that we like is going to get
00:53:43
knocked off. And then KC has a chance to
00:53:46
get knocked off by the Chargers. They're
00:53:48
two and a half point favorites. It's a
00:53:49
Friday night game. Fun week one thing.
00:53:51
Friday night NFL game. KCA in LA against
00:53:54
the Chargers only.
00:53:56
>> Oh, it's in Sa Paulo. It's another It's
00:53:58
another Sa Paulo game.
00:53:59
>> Oh, I thought it was in Los Angeles. Oh,
00:54:01
that's interesting.
00:54:01
>> No, no, no. It's counted as a home game
00:54:03
for the Rams, but it's in Sa Paulo.
00:54:05
>> Not Rams. You mean Chargers?
00:54:07
>> Chargers. Chargers. Sorry. The other
00:54:09
Yeah. The Rams have an interesting game
00:54:10
at home against the Texans, by the way.
00:54:12
That's another in see the interesting
00:54:14
thing about that is as you
00:54:16
>> if you beat let's say the Chargers beat
00:54:18
the Chiefs. Okay.
00:54:21
>> They're in some sense they're two games
00:54:23
up on the Chiefs
00:54:24
>> because
00:54:24
>> the season just started and they're two
00:54:26
up because they have they have the
00:54:27
tiebreaker and they and they're one
00:54:29
and0. So it's meaningful. It's a meaning
00:54:32
I would say the same thing about
00:54:33
Baltimore Buffalo. Assuming they don't
00:54:35
play again this year, which they're not
00:54:37
in the same division. They're not going
00:54:38
to play again this year. Whoever wins
00:54:40
that game essentially has almost a
00:54:42
twoame lead on the other team for home
00:54:45
field. This is worth more than one game.
00:54:47
This is worth more than one game. Come
00:54:49
on.
00:54:49
>> That that's that's interesting. Um well,
00:54:52
the I meant to reach out to our friend
00:54:55
uh Eric Jeff Argus, our our buddy up in
00:54:58
Buffalo. The you know, you know, I have
00:55:00
I thought about it in the offseason.
00:55:01
Jeff's a a buddy of ours in Buffalo, big
00:55:03
Bills fan, and in some way is
00:55:05
responsible for the show coming together
00:55:07
because you and I know each other
00:55:09
>> first. First first. That's true.
00:55:10
>> Because of Jeff. Um so it's hard not to
00:55:13
pull for those Bills. All those guys
00:55:15
give anything for them to get back to
00:55:16
the Super Bowl except I would take the
00:55:18
Ravens.
00:55:19
>> Yeah, you're a Ravens guy.
00:55:20
>> Well, top two teams. I'll take either
00:55:22
one of them. Okay. The other the other
00:55:23
big game I think over the weekend is
00:55:25
that um Detroit Green Bay game which is
00:55:30
Sunday afternoon an afternoon game four
00:55:32
o'clock game 425 game Detroit going into
00:55:34
Green Bay.
00:55:35
>> They are you know um coming off a couple
00:55:38
of great seasons but they are the
00:55:39
underdogs on the road to Green Bay. Is
00:55:42
Parson's I haven't read is Parson's
00:55:43
going to be fit enough to play his first
00:55:45
game on week one.
00:55:46
>> He there he's planning on playing.
00:55:48
Whether they have to inject him or not
00:55:49
is a separate issue in the back. He's
00:55:51
got a back issue, but yeah, they say
00:55:52
he's playing.
00:55:53
>> Okay, so we could talk a lot about that
00:55:55
trade because we have opinions about
00:55:56
trades and they gave up a ton of draft
00:55:58
capital, which we know is valuable. They
00:56:01
need to enjoy him in the immediate
00:56:03
future because they traded away some of
00:56:05
the outy years. And so this is a big
00:56:08
season for the Packers. That's for damn
00:56:09
sure.
00:56:09
>> No, I think I think you've brought it
00:56:11
up. I think um Kansas City and the
00:56:14
Chargers is a well above average game. I
00:56:18
think you've pointed out uh Detroit,
00:56:20
Green Bay, Houston and the uh Rams,
00:56:24
Baltimore, Buffalo, Minnesota, Chicago.
00:56:27
They're not, you know, and the good news
00:56:28
is um because of the way it's set up,
00:56:30
there's two of them at 4:00, but I can
00:56:32
watch all the rest of them. Like I can
00:56:34
watch all of them.
00:56:35
>> Yeah. Well, they gave us they've given
00:56:37
us a bunch of divisional stuff, too,
00:56:39
which is fun. To start us off right out
00:56:41
of the box with a bunch of these
00:56:42
divisional rivalries is is one of the
00:56:44
reasons that it's such a fun weekend.
00:56:46
What about big picture, Eric? When you
00:56:48
look at futures for the playoffs or the
00:56:50
Super Bowl, does anything jump out to
00:56:53
you? We can look at odds, you just pick
00:56:55
them off at ESPN or whatever.
00:56:57
>> All right. I'm not just saying this,
00:57:00
you know, the Bucks at 30 to1.
00:57:04
I I think they're better than 30 to1. I
00:57:07
mean, I've heard a lot of people Look,
00:57:09
do you know what team Kate has won their
00:57:11
division? Four straight years.
00:57:12
>> Is that right? I didn't know that.
00:57:14
Really? I mean, people Yeah, people
00:57:17
don't give them I mean, by the way, you
00:57:18
remember there was the that 20-year
00:57:20
stretch where nobody repeated in the NFC
00:57:22
South.
00:57:23
>> No, I don't pay I don't pay much
00:57:24
attention to the NFC South to be honest.
00:57:26
>> Well, whatever. The Bucks have won their
00:57:28
division four straight years. If they
00:57:29
win, obviously this that's five straight
00:57:32
years. They're in a weak division.
00:57:34
>> So already that puts you, if they win
00:57:36
the division, that already puts you in
00:57:37
the top four seeds. You at least have
00:57:39
one home playoff game. You're obviously
00:57:40
probably the favorite in that game. All
00:57:42
right. So now you're in the conference
00:57:44
semifinals. So I just think the Bucks
00:57:47
being 30 to1. And look, Baker Mayfield,
00:57:51
that man can throw the football and and
00:57:53
No, no. And I'm saying if Godwin's
00:57:56
healthy, which is an if, and Mike Evans
00:57:59
still healthy and they drafted a a
00:58:00
receiver in the first round and their
00:58:03
running back, Bucky Irving, you know,
00:58:05
they can score the football now whether
00:58:06
they'll play defense good enough. So
00:58:08
that's the thing. I'm not just saying
00:58:09
that as a Bucks fan. The Bucks sitting
00:58:11
there at 30 to1.
00:58:13
>> Well, what I like what I most like about
00:58:15
it is that the NFC if you if if the if
00:58:18
you think Philly is gonna struggle at
00:58:20
all, if you don't think they're just
00:58:21
going to plow through the NFC, then the
00:58:22
NFC is pretty open. Like taking a long
00:58:24
shot in the AFC doesn't make a lot of
00:58:26
sense because you've got three of the
00:58:28
big ones to fall down. All three of them
00:58:29
have to fall down. For the NFC, I mean,
00:58:32
any number of teams. Do you think
00:58:34
Washington's gonna do it again? Probably
00:58:36
not. What about the Vikings? Do you
00:58:37
think their new quarterback's gonna be
00:58:38
able to do it? You know, maybe um the
00:58:42
Niners are in there, the Rams are in
00:58:44
there, the Packs is in there, the Lion
00:58:45
the Lions are probably best. The Lions
00:58:48
the Lions could have made the Super Bowl
00:58:49
easily last year.
00:58:51
>> I look I the reason I'm willing to say
00:58:53
the Rams also is remember I was at that
00:58:56
game. The Rams I I'll make to my dying
00:58:59
day. I'll say the Rams were the better
00:59:01
team at Eagles. Like that snow game. The
00:59:04
Rams looked like they were the better
00:59:05
team. I'll tell you what it definitely
00:59:07
was true. Matthew Stafford was better
00:59:09
that day.
00:59:09
>> It was one of the best It was one of the
00:59:11
best snow performances by a quarterback
00:59:13
I've ever seen. It was shockingly good
00:59:16
in the snow. Shockingly good.
00:59:18
>> Shockingly good. So, I'm saying why
00:59:19
can't the Rams go to the Super Bowl? Of
00:59:21
course they can. Sure they can.
00:59:23
>> All right. Well, the mystery starts
00:59:25
unraveling or unfolding or being
00:59:27
revealed to some extent in just two
00:59:30
short days. So, we'll kick the season
00:59:32
off on Thursday. We'll talk about it
00:59:33
next time around. Why don't we wrap for
00:59:36
there for the whole crew? Eric Bradler
00:59:39
who's been in here through the whole
00:59:40
thing. Audi Winer all but the last 10
00:59:42
minutes. Shane Jensen and Absentia, Dion
00:59:45
Simpkins, the boss man, keeping us on
00:59:47
track all these years. Deep Patel, the
00:59:49
new boss lady in town. And for you guys,
00:59:52
the listeners, thanks for listening. Oh,
00:59:53
Marissa Raina. Marissa Raina, our
00:59:55
producer as well. Many thanks to her.
00:59:57
For you guys, the listeners, thanks for
00:59:58
being with us. Come back and join us
00:59:59
next time. Between now and then, enjoy
01:00:02
your sports.
01:00:05
[Music]
