2012 Draft: Wacky prediction #1 Jim Irsay selects Robert Griffin III

In the surprise upset of the century thus far, Jim Ersay and the Colts will select Robert Griffin III #1 over-all in the coming NFL Draft.  Robert Griffin, not Andrew Luck, will become Peyton Manning's successor in the Colt's lineup.  This will be the shocker of shockers in 2012.

Why? Let me give you a list of reasons why:

1. Jim Irsay is a Gemini
2. Robert Griffin III is an Aquarius
3. A number of astrological programs I own predict Irsay will like Griffin better than Luck.
4. This is pretty straightforward, if you understand the theory behind it, but there are some interesting wrinkles in this pile of numbers.
5. Jim Irsay has been making some emotional and intuitive decisions lately... like the decision to fire Vice-Chairman Bill Polian.
6. When decisions are made at the gut-level, you chose the kid you like better, rather than the one who comes most-highly recommended.
7. In terms of pure combine numbers, it is likely Griffin will out-perform Luck at the track-meet in Indianapolis.  This will provide a fig-leaf of science to cover pure choice by preference.
8. Robert Griffin III will 'fit' with current Colt personnel such as Dallas Clark, Pierre Garcon, and Donald Brown somewhat better than Andrew Luck will.  These are three of the survivors expected to come forward into the new era of Colt football.
9. Many voices are muttering and murmuring about the coming era of the super-mobile athletic quarterback.  Of course, it's guys like Steve Young, Michael Vick, Tim Tebow and Cam Newton who created this buzz.  RGIII is expected to raise that buzz.  Many traditionalists reject this argument vehemently.  I suspect that Irsay will be willing to give it a try.  

The interesting wrinkle is that some software programs predict Irsay will like Griffin better on first contact, but get along better with Luck over the long-term.  

Every have one of those relationships?  You like somebody a lot at first, only to discover you don't get along that well in the long-run?  Ever have a luke-warm to cold reaction to someone at first, only to discover you are highly compatible later on?

This is basically what the Astrological software predicts.  Irsay is going to like Robert Griffin a lot when he first meets him, but it may be a difficult marriage in the long run.  Irsay's first meeting with Andrew Luck is going to leave him cold.  He's just not going to have a good or strong feeling about drafting Andrew.  If he does, it should work out fine in the long run.

Beware of those gut-level and intuitive reactions to people.  You can't always trust your feelings.  As the scientists say, try to disprove your theory, don't try to prove your theory.  You're heart can tell lies.

What is this crap about Peyton Manning being out for the season?

Rumor has it that Jake Query, a radio show host for 1260 AM Radio (WNDE) in Indianapolis, is spreading the word that Peyton Manning is out for the entire 2011 season.

Query reports that he has two reputable sources [whatever that means] who stated that Manning had third surgery on his neck either on Sunday or Monday. According to these reports, Manning will miss the entire 2011 season.

You can read about it here.

Colts owner Jim Irsay denied this rumor through twitter. He vows to clarify the situation soon. Ad meanwhile Peyton has absolutely confirmed that he is out for the opening game against Houston. Jason La Canfora says it will be more than just the first week. La Canfora is on the record saying Peyton will miss the entire month of September.

Jamie Dukes has routinely criticized the Colts organization for running without a back up QB. He often said they were playing a game of Russian Roulette. The Playmaker Michael Irvin has chastised the Colts for letting the team go this long without a good, strong, young, competent backup. I tend to agree.

Something a little like the worst case scenario seems have befallen the Colts this year. Of course, the worst case scenario is to lose Peyton permanently, and we aren't there yet. Hopefully, we aren't going there, or anywhere near there.

Still, I know the folks in Indiana are panicking big time.

Of course, I feel terrible for Peyton, one of the best men--in addition to the best player--in the league. We hope he gets better post-haste.

Still, I am glad I didn't make the Colts my favorite to win the AFC South. I knew something serious was up last year. Peyton just wasn't himself. Most reports indicated that he was not out on the field drilling during the lockout. That is most un-Peyton like. I knew something was wrong. Those stories were confirmed when we heard all these reports about two different surgical procedures on his neck. I knew this was bad, bad, bad stuff. Any surgery around the spinal column is dreadful stuff.

I am very interested in finding out what's going on here.

Rush Limbaugh and the PC HQ of the NFL

When I got home from work last night, I was rather amazed by some of the things I saw on ESPN. Less so with the NFL network. Before playing a nice game of "He said, She said" let us establish the ground rules for the interpretation of PC statements.

First, let us forever dismiss in the Kindergarten of social inquiry the preposterous notion that PC is about being Liberal. That is simply not true. Second, we must dismiss the misguided theory that PC is about avoiding offending anyone. Third, let us also dismiss, with some consideration, the idea that PC is about establishing a fascist-enforced liberal orthodoxy of speech and thought. That was almost true for a time during the early 1990s.

No folks, PC is not about any of those things. Rather, it is about outright intellectual dishonesty. It is about not saying what you think. It is about not dropping a card which can be used against you at a later time; ostensibly when you are running for office, or when you need a favor. It is about making ambiguous statements that people can interpret as they please, without clarity. This allows you to become all things to all people. That is something most politicians want to do.

Did Roger Goodell say he would oppose Rush Limbaugh as an NFL owner? Nope. You read that into his statements. You had some help. Remember PC is about outright intellectual dishonesty, and making unclear statements that people can read as they will. Did Jim Irsay say that he was a liberal and would never allow a conservative to buy an NFL franchise? Nope. You may have interpreted it that way, but you would be wrong.

No folks, what these two gentlemen said was more like this: "We of the NFL market a product. We want to sell to everybody. We have a lot of Black customers. Right or wrong, Black folks tend to hate Rush. Ergo, we just can't allow him in the organization because he just might spoil one segment of the market. We don't want that."

When you strip the unclarity from Roger's statements, he basically said that the NFL cannot afford to have a highly political owner of any type. That's all he said. Any highly political dude is going to be controversial with some segment of the vast NFL market. Ergo any highly political owner would polarize the NFL market. This cannot be allowed. It would be bad for marketing.

Let's do three bits of truth telling while we are at this. I hate PC with all my heart and soul, so let me be brutally honest with you.

1. Reports of Rush Limbaugh's racism are vastly over-stated. Regrettably, the Black community--or at least certain bad leaders like Jessie Jackson--have had a tendency to pull the race card against any guy who might oppose social welfare policy or affirmative action. Any opposition to these two planks gets you blacklisted as a racist immediately. There is a massive logical fallacy in this reasoning, but this has always been the argument.
2. Reports of the NFL's anti-racism are fairly exaggerated. If you could really see inside the minds of some NFL owners, you would find a degree of racism there that would dwarf anything inside the mind of Rush Limbaugh.
3. Owners are going to be required to be a-political for marketing reasons, not for any egalitarian reasons. It's a financial thing. It has nothing to do with ideology.

So what about the famous Donovan McNab statements made by Limbaugh? Truth be told, he was absolutely and completely right. Those statements were made in the run up to the 2004 Super Bowl which featured the Eagles and the Patriots. Donovan's horrendous performance in the 4th quarter sure justified everything Rush said about Donovan. Donovan made Rush look great in that terrible 4th Quarter.

Do you remember the game? Did you watch the game? Did you actually really watch the game? I saw the Eagle defense absolutely hammering the Patriot offense by the 4th quarter. The Patriots were on the Ropes. The Eagle offense had ample opportunity to win that game in the 4th quarter. They did not. Terrible passing and horrendous clock management by McNabb lost the game for the Eagles. It was one of the most pitiful performances I have ever seen by a QB in the clutch moments of a game.

I am not the only one who knows this to be the fact of the matter. Why don't you consult Terrel Owens about this question. He sure felt that way, and with good reason. Donovan fucked it up. Instead of admitting that Donovan fucked up the Super Bowl, the NFL powers that be label Terrel a big trouble maker, they throw Rush off of ESPN, and they deride all the Philly fans who know that Donovan fucked the game up.

To this day, many Eagle fans know they cannot win the Super Bowl with McNabb at the helm. They know this because of that terrible Super Bowl performance. Both ESPN and the NFL Network continue to beat Philly fans for expressing themselves on this subject.

You know why? Because it messes up the marketing campaign, that's why.