Faceoff: Thursday's unheralded hero? No TV? Mud Pitt?
Pete Prisco and Clark Judge of CBSSports.com analyze hot topics weekly.
| 1. Name an under-the-radar player in the Dallas-Green Bay game who could impact the outcome. | |
| Pete Prisco | Clark Judge |
 I'll give you two. I'm going with the two Green Bay offensive tackles. Mark Tauscher plays the right side, Chad Clifton the left. Those two will have to have good games keeping the outside pass rushers off Brett Favre. Clifton excels in pass protection, so he should be able to handle the speed rushers. Tauscher is the better all-around tackle, and he, too, is capable in pass protection. But Dallas has great speed off the corners, especially in DeMarcus Ware. Those two tackles will come up big Thursday night and keep Favre clean. The hope then is that the undermanned inside of the Green Bay offensive line can do its part. If they do, the Packers should get plenty of big-play chances down the field. |  Dallas wide receiver Patrick Crayton. I know he's coming off an ankle injury, but he returned to practice Monday and is expected to start. If that happens, he could make an impact because Crayton is to Terrell Owens what Alvin Harper was to Michael Irvin. When opponents go out of their way to take out Owens it's Crayton who has an opportunity to make big plays on the outside. You figure the Packers could put Al Harris on Owens, and, if Charles Woodson is available, they might have him take some turns covering tight end Jason Witten. That would leave Crayton in single coverage, and ask the Giants how risky that can be. I think the Cowboys are going to try to run these guys to death, which means you could choose anyone from their offensive line as a factor. But if they're forced to pass, the Cowboys might be forced to turn to Crayton. And that can be good. |
| 2. Who should we blame for many not seeing Thursday night's Packers-Cowboys game? | |
| Pete Prisco | Clark Judge |
| Blame Comcast. And blame the NFL. I can understand why the NFL wants games on its own network, which this one will be on. They have to try to drum up viewers. So far, the NFL Network has underachieved. There are some who wonder if the league wouldn't be better off selling it to someone else and getting out of the television business. But NFL commissioner Roger Goodell is a big believer in the network and feels it can grow. With Comcast balking at paying the fees the NFL wants to put its channel on the regular cable tier -- it's available on the sports tier for a fee -- the Green Bay-Dallas game won't be seen by a lot of people Thursday. That's not right. But it's also big business. Who can blame either side? This, like Roger Goodell said the other day, is a negotiation. That's what happens in matters like this. Both sides think they're right. So who wins? I don't know. I know who loses. It's the fans that don't get to see the NFC's regular-season Super Bowl. The NFL and Comcast will work this out. Maybe not having this mega-game on for all to see will be the thing that spurs both sides to do something about it. I hope so. | From what little I understand of what's going on I'll blame the NFL, and here's why: If you have something you're trying to sell ... and you can't ... don't you drop the price until you hook your buyers? We just received a catalogue from a national retail chain that said it was offering a 40 percent discount on its inventory to get us back as customers. Until I read that, I wasn't interested. Now I am. The same goes for the NFL Network's demand for 70 cents per subscriber. Cable firms consider that exorbitant, so they're not buying. The NFL's response is to offer more attractive games and demand that subscribers revolt. That hasn't happened, either. What we have here is a failure to negotiate. So drop the price to where prospective buyers can't say no. It works for retail. Why can't it work for the NFL? Getting some money is better than getting none. |
| 3. Monday night's Steelers-Dolphins game was played in a quagmire. Should the NFL force the Steelers to put in a new surface? | |
| Pete Prisco | Clark Judge |
| Yes. That field was a disgrace to a league that makes millions and teams that make millions. The NFL is the best sport going. To have a marquee game played on a field in that condition was inexcusable. The players could have been badly hurt playing in that swamp. It reduced the game to comedic proportions. The joke was whether anyone could score not who was executing the best. Why in the heck would the city, the Steelers and the University of Pittsburgh allow high school games to be played there three days before the Steelers played and a day before Pitt played there? That makes no sense. If you want to do that, get a fake field of some sort. There are several out there and most now are as good as grass. It's not like the old Astroturf days. Let's hope we don't see that mess again anytime soon. | It should at least consider doing something. Look, I know laying sod on top of grass was the NFL's suggestion in the first place, and I also know Steelers' officials seemed happy with it when they toured the stadium Sunday night. But it didn't work a day later. By adding water, a football field became a cranberry bog. The NFL is on top of the situation, with someone there to inspect the field this week, and Steelers' officials don't seem all that concerned -- saying freak weather conditions were responsible for Monday's mess. But there was nothing freaky about what happened. It rained. That's it. And it will rain again. If and when the Steelers host a playoff game that could be a factor. So do something while you can. The Steelers' last two games are on the road, which is a perfect time to try something different. Then, when the season is over, the Steelers can think about putting in FieldTurf for 2008. |
| 4. Did the Eagles expose New England's flaws? | |
| Pete Prisco | Clark Judge |
| Flaws that have been there all year long, but most teams are afraid to attack them. By that, I mean the middle of the New England defense. It is beatable, especially in coverage. The linebackers are all 30 or older and that's a time when they slow down. That might not show up when you're trying to run on them, but it will when you get them involved in coverage. The Colts did it when they faced them with Joseph Addai and the Eagles did it with their passing game Sunday. Not only that, but safety Rodney Harrison isn't great in coverage either. Lock him up on a tight end and he should lose that battle. But for a team to play that way takes guts. Andy Reid had them Sunday night. He went there with a backup quarterback and decided he wasn't going to play not to lose, but rather to win. How many other coaches will do that? Maybe Reid's success will mandate it down the road. Having said all that, I have two words for those teams readying to face the Pats now and in the playoffs. Good luck. | Flaws? What flaws? You can drive the ball on the Patriots' defense, and Indianapolis proved that. You simply must be patient, mine the middle of the field and get the right matchups on their linebackers. Look, I like their linebackers, too, but they're not young, and age doesn't wear well over a 16-game season. Old legs tire as the season wears on. Indianapolis took advantage of the Pats' linebackers with Joseph Addai, and Philadelphia tried with Brian Westbrook. Defensively, the Eagles demonstrated that if you can take away the deep ball and attack the pocket you can have success against Tom Brady. In fact, they shut down New England on all but one second-half series. The key was that they were active with their linebackers, moving them backward and forward, and effective with their pass rush. That is not a novel concept; Philadelphia simply did it better than others. And it still lost. |
