Experts & Clowns: Discussing Brett Favre, the Spurs, March Madness and Derek Anderson

Welcome to the 22nd edition of Experts and Clowns. Many of you have been here before and know the drill. For those of you who don't, we ask four topical sports questions and give each of our panel a chance to answer. Let's meet our panel:

Jake Emen recently added a photo as his avatar. It's nice to know what you look like. However, don't be shy about asking for a refund for that photoshop class.

Michael Grisso came up with some great nicknames for our panel last week. I think the fact he made me a psychiatrist speaks to his need for some therapy. It's a shame those Geico commercials are still getting to him.

Zac Wassink puts the Hobo in Hoboken. He actually prefers having people ask what exit he lives on off the turnpike rather than hearing Red Right 88 or The Drive or The Fumble or Jordan over Ehlo or Jose Mesa or...

Nick Meyer published six articles on Tuesday and was the first person to submit his answers for this session. The man's a machine. We just hope he comes with that unlimited power train warranty.

And you all know me - I'm still running against the wind.

**********

What is Brett Favre's legacy and did he damage his reputation by wavering on the retirement issue for years before finally giving in for what could be described as a lack of faith in his teammates?

Zac - Here's what bothers me. Everybody knows that Favre is retiring because Randall Moss will not be playing in Green Bay this season. Favre has acted like a spoiled bratty kid these past few years but has been given a pass because, well, he's Brett Favre. That fact alone answers the question about Brett Favre. His legacy is more than secure and he may very well be the greatest quarterback in the history of the game. Quite frankly, I'm glad that his last pass was a big reason why my New York football Giants won the Super Bowl.

Jake - Brett Favre will be remembered as one of the most exciting and beloved NFL quarterbacks of all time. If this retirement sticks, and judging him only by guys who are also already retired, he'd have to be in the top 3 in my book - next to Joe Montana and John Elway. His numbers are near identical to Marino's, including the interception and passer rating stats; plus of course, there's the ring.

The year-in-year-out retirement schtick got old 2 winters ago, but it doesn't damage his legacy. What bothers me is his somewhat childish, get me a big playmaker or I'm out routine. If a less media-beloved player made those demands, they'd get some heat for it. Big Ben said he wanted some tall playmakers, and there was plenty of discussion about whether or not he threw his teammates like Hines Ward under the bus with that remark. Meanwhile, the Packers last year had one of the best passing offenses in the league, so why does Brett Favre need more playmakers? It's disrespectful to his teammates. None of it will be remembered in the longterm however and Favre will be remembered for his childish (this time in a good way) love for the game he showed every Sunday.

Nick - I don't think Favre damaged his legacy much at all to be honest. If he had been playing say 10 years ago none of that petty stuff about his teammates would have come out. The great ones like Favre and Michael Jordan for instance always are a little bit critical of their teammates because they're so competitive. The only knocks on Favre will be his problems with interceptions from time to time and tendency to throw crucial ones in the playoffs. He did that again this year against the New York Giants so that might remain in peoples' memories for a little while, however. Favre knew the clock was ticking and he wanted to make one more run at a championship so you can't fault him for getting on management about not trading for Randy Moss for example.

Mike - This question is absurd in regards to lack of faith in his teammates considering he talked them up all year and then would think its just not possible? Come on, you build on that and a guy that has been in the league since 90-91 when the Atlanta Falcons didn't want him, knows this. He proved this past year he could be just as good as any other quarterback in the league at his age. Yes, that means Tom "dump -1 to 3 yard passes all the time until Randy Moss was wide open" Brady like Rich Gannon did to Doug Jolley when they got to the Super Bowl before losing as well.

Now that Favre has retired they can officially make a Mt. Lambeau with the heads of Paul Hornung, Vince Lombardi, Ray Nitschke, and Brett Favre. A guy that broke all kinds of passing records in several categories, was the most durable quarterback ever to play the game, then has an easy path to Canton, Ohio and the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Whats his legacy, are you kidding me? Did he damage his reputation? Oh I don't know, ask all the Packer fans that filled the stadium for the last 16 years since his first start against the Steelers.

Who even asked this question? The people that would think he hurt his reputation, are those who didn't like him in the first place or just trying to start a debate over a great career. Pretty soon we'll hear stories of his possible involvement with steroids or something stupid like that just to try and cause doubt. Just like this question.

Scoring - Zac gets minus one for calling Randy Gene Moss Randall and another minus one for suggesting that Favre might be better than Elway. Mike gets two points for the Mt. Lambeau remark and his summation.

The San Antonio Spurs are the defending champions and they are in 1st place. How are they so under the radar?

Jake - Because they don't play in Los Angeles, they don't have anybody in the police blotter and they didn't make a major deadline trade. But more to the actual reason why, in the beginning of the season they were seriously injury plagued. All of their big three (Duncan, Ginobli and Parker) were missing games and playing at less than 100%. So they struggled out of the gate (compared to their usual golden standard and some of the other West powers). While they struggled, there was the Kobe-Bynum-Gasol story in LA, Kidd to Dallas, Shaq to Phoenix, a soaring Rockets team, the young upstart Hornets led by Chris Paul, Williams and Boozer doing their best Stockton and Malone impression... and it goes on from there! The Spurs aren't a catchy story line right now, but I guarantee you they will be once the playoffs begin.

Zac - The Spurs are under the radar for a few reasons. They certainly aren't "sexy" by any means. The Spurs don't have a LeBron or Kobe. No Boston Three-Party. Unfortunately, they're just a good old fashioned team that wins. It also doesn't help that they play in San Antonio. If the Spurs were in New York or Los Angeles I think the country would pay more attention to them. I'm sure they don't mind not receiving the attention, though.

Mike - When have they not been under the radar? They are a team that plays fundamental old school basketball and don't play a flashy game (like Detroit). Take the rest of the NBA and think about it for a minute; the Celtics, Lakers, Suns, Mavs, Cavs, are all teams that are exciting and have players that can take over a game all by themselves.

You also have to take into account that they have the pretty much the same team. So besides winning games they don't have major trades that go on billion dollar owners that stays in the news because he wants to buy a baseball team, and players scoring 52 points in a game so therefore they aren't exciting for the majority of the fans and the media knows this too.

Nick - Because they're boring. Not in the way they play mind you. They play team-oriented basketball that is fun to watch especially if you're a purist. But they fly under the radar because they have boring personalities. Tim Duncan has the right to be the most confident basketball player on the planet with all he's accomplished yet he walks around with his head down like a depressed teenager. Sorry to say it about Tim because I appreciate how great he is and like his game, and he's a great guy, but he doesn't give the media anything to talk about. No emotion whatsoever.

Ginobili is also a quiet assassin. Some people don't like him because he flops but mostly people ignore him because he doesn't talk much. His game is a thing of joy to watch other than the flopping, however.

Then there's Tony Parker, who is quiet and unassuming as well. How awesome would it be if Duncan called out Amare Stoudemire or something? That would make people care about the Spurs quite a bit.

Scoring - Everyone gave good answers on this one. To make it easy, I'm just going to take one point away from Nick for asking Tim Duncan, the classiest player in the league, to act like a punk.

Is there any team outside of the top 10 in men's college basketball that will win the NCAA Championship?

Mike - Nope. Depending on how the brackets come out it will be either UNC, Kansas, Duke, or Texas. I actually am going to take Texas myself when we start filling those bad boys out on ESPN. Even though the they lost at Texas Tech the last 3 minutes of the game they looked much more poised than the Red Raiders and just kept coming up with shot after shot. Had Pat Knight's team not shot 43 free throw attempts to the Longhorns 13 attempts, Texas would have won by 10 or 15 points. Not to mention D.J. Augustin is by far the best point guard in the nation.

Memphis (weak schedule always hurts in tourney), Xavier (see Memphis), Stanford doesn't fair well on the road even though they have only 4 losses three were on the road, 1 to Siena, and 4 other games on the road were won by a total of 9 points. If you look at the USA poll G-town is at #10, but after watching Marquette expose the Hoyas problems with turnover that will haunt them in the tournament. Tennessee showed they are vulnerable, especially going to the wire against a Patterson-less Wildcat team. Last but not least Wisconsin which I really want to put up there with the rest of them as a serious contender, but they also struggle on the road and got very lucky at Texas and at Indiana so I think when they have to go outside their realm it will hurt them in the end.

Nick - If you want to count Georgetown at #11 in the AP then certainly. They have great athletes all over the court that have good basketball IQ to boot and have a lot of tourney experience. Indiana is very up-and-down but Eric Gordon is an unreal scorer and shooter who could get hot and carry them all the way with some luck.

Zac - No. There really is a large disparity between the top ten and the rest of the country. The only teams right now that I can see winning six straight games in the next month are all in the top ten. It is early yet, though, and perhaps a team outside of the top ten will get hot during a conference championship. Remember that, in March Madness, national champs are made in conference championships.

Jake - Assuming the question is "can any team outside the top 10 win the NCAA Championship", than absolutely. Three teams outside of the top 10 in the AP Poll that I could see myself filling in as championship winner depending on how the brackets turn out: Wisconsin, Georgetown and Louisville. Texas is in the top 10 right now but may not end up there and they will be a big threat come tournament time as well. Of those teams I listed I like Georgetown and Louisville the best. But I mean, don't listen to me, I've only won my bracket 2 of the last 4 years. Hmmm, I remember in the beginning of the season being the only one on this panel saying Michael Beasley would be the best rookie in college this year. I rest my case.

Scoring - Jake gave the best answer and then ruined it with his self-promotion. Still, I think I'll give him one point here and remind everyone that he said Johan Santana would either get traded to the Red Sox or stay in Minnesota.

Are the Browns making a mistake bringing back Derek Anderson? Do you believe he'll be traded before the NFL Draft?

Nick - Absolutely not. Good QB's are too important to hang onto no matter what. When you have a proven guy like Anderson you have to lock him up. Brady Quinn will still get his shot but he can always be traded, or Anderson could be as well. Good QB's are hard to find not to mention injuries are so commonplace these days. I don't think the Browns will trade Anderson either because they have a starving fan base who wants to win now and if they go with the young Quinn the odds are against them finishing much better than they did last year which was not good enough. Also, Quinn has a lot of incentive-based clauses in his contract and he was taken #22 so it's not like they're paying him franchise-type money to sit the bench or anything.

Mike - No, in fact it is really a smart choice because of how the team came together last year and on a financial standpoint for Quinn. Anderson's 3-year deal for $24 million may have been a bit much since he pushed towards free agency only to throw in a "psyche!"(old 8th grade word, lol) then come right back to the Browns.

I don't think he'll be traded because Cleveland will want to build on last season and if Quinn came in now most of the players would (especially on offense) feel as though they had to start over. That wouldn't help team chemistry.

Plus, I don't think Cleveland really planned on playing Quinn for awhile the way they structured his contract. I mean he has $11 million in incentives for his 5 year deal, but he had to take 55% of the snaps in the first two years, 70% in his 3rd, but wouldn't be paid until 2010 and 11. I know Savage said the Browns were ready to move on without Anderson, but money wise I don't think so and when D.A.'s contract is up Brady will have a year or two before he hits the market himself.

Jake - No, it's not a mistake, and hell no, he won't be traded. You don't give a player the kind of money and guaranteed money that the Browns gave to Derek Anderson and then trade him. And why would they want to? Brady Quinn is completely unproven in the NFL. Wait, Brady Quinn was completely unproven in college too! He never showed he could win a big game and seeing 100 more EAS commercials about how jacked he is won't change my mind until (and if) I see it happen. Either way, we won't get that chance this year.

Zac - As the only resident Browns follower in this group, I have very mixed emotions on this. All the Browns need is yet another quarterback controversy (third in six years counting Quinn vs. Anderson). I like that the Browns didn't completely overpay for Anderson's services. Still, this is a team that needs help on defense and could use the cap room in order to improve on the line and the secondary. I can't complain with the moves that have been made thus far. I would be very surprised, though, if the Browns go into the NFL Draft without any picks on Day 1. Face it, kids. Phil Savage loves the Draft.

Scoring - Again, all good answers here. Nick gets plus one for mentioning that neither contract prevents the Browns from trading one of their QBs. Mike gets plus two (would have been three except for dragging us all down with his 8th grade stuff) for breaking down the contract. Jake gets plus one for the EAS line. Zac gets two points for packing a lot of information into a very small paragraph. He would have gotten another point if he didn't point out that he was a Browns fan. We know, Zac, we know.

**********

So, it looks like Mike is our expert this week. This week's prize is a copy of the AP Style Handbook. Enjoy!