Space Jews and Sandpeople: Prominent Racism in Sci-Fi/Fantasy Film and Television

I watch a lot of TV, and I've seen a lot of movies (I don't know how many, but let's say less than Roger Ebert, and more than Aeschylus). If you're above that, then fuck you. Yes, a lot of TV and a lot of movies suck, but so does a lot of that culture that high society stuffs its collective shirt with (don't you dare tell me it is improper to end a sentence with a preposition). If your life is too "full" for television, you'd never be caught dead reading this, so I won't worry about letting a low-brow joke slip.... hershey squirts. There, now that that's off my chest I can finally end this inane paragraph and arrive at the thrust of this article.

Space Jews! While the term in and of itself is racist coming from an Earth White, it has actually become a somewhat recognized trope in fiction, meaning "an alien, monster, or other nonhuman creature that embodies the worst aspects of a real-world racial stereotype" (according to tvtropes.org). As even a moderate sci-fi loser nerd geek, several examples of the Space Jew immediately come to mind. I am not saying that the filmmakers are racist, I am saying that their work invokes some serious stereotypes. Don't get me wrong, a good stereotype -- like how all Europeans get up for an extended stand at inappropriate times on planes -- can make a man's day. In fact, Dave Chappelle built a palace of comedy on a foundation of stereotypes and subsequently made college better for every one of us. Having said that, some of the following Space Jews just seem a little classless.

No surprises there.

We can go on all day about how terrible George Lucas is, but after he created Star Wars, you couldn't say he lacked creativity. So then why couldn't he come up with something less offensive than..... the Sand People.

Because fuck you, that's why. U-S-A. U-S-A.

In all fairness, they're later known as Tusken Raiders, a name explained in the expanded universe. But the "Expanded Star Wars Universe" may as well be the proverbial pinky-in-the-ass (I don't dabble). No, I am sticking to the movies, and in the movies, these Arabs are Sand-People. And they are just the worst.

Why it might not be racist:

Have you ever seen Tatooine? That bitch is sandy. These were never going to be the Lush Woodland People.

Why it almost definitely IS racist:

Sandpeople! Who are fully covered except maybe their eyes. Not to mention that they are sorta terrorists. Although their plots are nothing like modern day Islamic terrorists. They usually only involve kidnapping any person who is in their country -- even if that person is minding his or her own business but just in the wrong place at the wrong time -- and then torturing said pers.... oh wait. But let's not put the suicide before the explosion here... not all Sandpeople are terrorists, just an extremist sect. Which is why when you launch a full-scale broad-range attack, you're goin' to the dark side.

No but Anakin really did kill them all.

The Sandpeople weren't the only Arabs being thematically lambasted in the film. Meet the Jawas...

Cute right? Wrong.

The Jawas are described as the rodent-like natives of Tatooine who are the quintessential scavengers for new technology. I just saved you the first 30 minutes of Iron Man(Note to You: See Iron Man, it was awesome).

These little scamps are pretty harmless however, as their main goal is to sell or trade whatever they find. You could say they are the Shi'a to the Sandpeoples' Sunni (a sentence which dropped out of my ass). I'm gonna go with NOT RACIST even if it's only because the Sandpeople hogged it all.

Besides the inclusion of Sandpeople, the original trilogy came and went without so much as a whispered epithet, not even fish-belly (I thought long and hard about an Ewok connection to a stereotype. Please enlighten me if it comes to you easier than it did me). Then came Phantom Menace, which apart from the sexual confusion -- an 18 year old Natalie Portman pretended to be a 14 year old (now I know the vice versa can get me into some hot water, but....) -- gave us Watto.



Look at that picture. Do you see it? No? Look again...



Believe it or not those were not the same picture.

Why it's racist:

If you ask any Star Wars fan to describe Watto, they will not speak one sentence without the words "business" or "savvy." Also.... LOOK AT HIM! In creating alien races there are literally endless business sense-nose-hat combinations that could be used. I don't know about you, but if I'm the creator and the first answer is "savvy," I'm making sure the next two aren't "long/hooked" and "that one;" maybe not the first go-round, but at some point during editing.

Why it's almost definitely NOT racist:

In a forced labor situation, when is it the Jew that is the slaver and not the slavee?

A resounding NEVER beats out the "look at that nose" argument, but only by a 9% tip.

Tune in tomorrow for a shift to racism in the Star Trek universe...

Best TV Beards

I haven't been clean shaven in nigh 2 years. Yet I wouldn't call what I have a beard, at least not by beards' standards. It ceases to be the sum of its parts; a mass of hairs patchy in some areas and sparse in others. It seems counter-intuitive to think of a beard as being devoid of laziness, but the clockwork grooming is a necessary element, at least if you want to look cool. Below are some beards from television history that put mine to shame.

Uncle Phil. Fresh Prince of Bel Air James Avery



Uncle Phil rocked the salt-and-pepper look before it was cool. It is truly the most versatile beard on TV. Its obviously a don't-fuck-with-me beard, teeming with so much raw power it's a wonder he didn't toss Jazz all the way to the Bay Area. It also conveys an authoritative "not under my roof." Sophistication, worldliness, weariness, the list goes on and on. But what is truly remarkable about this beard is its raw animal magnetism. Neither of the Aunt Vivs could drop trow fast enough when Uncle Phil flashed the charm.

Dr. Teeth. The Muppet Show. Himself.



Throwing in a neck beard is bending the rules a little bit, but to my credit its length was scrupulously maintained. Plus, a beardless Dr. Teeth just doesn't translate to frontman of the Electric Mayhem. This is the kind of a beard that empowers a man to defeat all this "No means NO" nonsense...


Rape joke

Al Borland. Home Improvement. Richard Karn



Al fucking Borland. Possibly the most genial beard this side of the North Pole, it is no wonder a simple assistant's fanbase can far outnumber that of Tool Time's showrunner Tim Taylor. Who wouldn't trust this beard with their daughters?

Commander William T. Riker. Star Trek: The Next Generation. Jonathan Frakes



Although the above picture eliminates the need for any explanation, there is simply so much to mention about this iconic beard. In addition to being copied by every single Just For Men model, Riker's glorious beard actually spawned the phrase "Growing the Beard," which essentially means the opposite of "jumping the shark." Riker was beardless during the first season of The Next Generation, and the show was considered a critical and commercial disaster. But once the beard graced the small screen in Season 2, the show became a hit. Examples of other hit shows that "grew the beard" are Parks and Rec, and evenSeinfeld!

Can anyone think of other good TV beards?

- Carm

Scariest Thing I Have Ever Heard

So, in summation, a virus in gypsy moth caterpillars is causing them to involuntarily climb up trees and die, where their bodies proceed to liquefy and rain down onto other caterpillars, which in turn infects other caterpillars with the virus. Is this just the first recorded case of ZOMBIE-ISM, or the first of many? More news to foll- GAHHH...... braaaaaaaaains.

-Carm

Say Anything: Defending Plax

Most of you have likely read this article on ESPN.com about some recent comments made by Plaxico Burress, many of which in an interview with Men's Journal. As per its usually bullshit ESPN's homepage labels this story "Burress rips Coughlin, Eli." Besides committing the repeated offense of making a story where there is none, this is a callous dismissal of the opportunity for actual journalism.

In the past, I've shown zero sympathy for Michael Vick. I'd be a blatant hypocrite if I didn't differentiate the two recently-jailed players; the attempt may well be fruitless because as cotent an explanation as I can make still yields to the inescapable reality that Burress won a Super Bowl with the Giants (the top sports moment of my life) and Vick is an Eagle (a team I despise with every fiber of my being). The truth is, yes, that even if Vick and Burress committed the same offense and spent the same amount of jail time I would probably still view Burress more favorably. But they did not commit the same offense, nor did they share the same sentence.

The main argument from a Vick apologist is simply "He did his jail time, and now he's working with Anti-dogfighting organizations, what more does he have to do?" To state that question in more detail would be to say "what more does he have to do to earn your forgiveness?" As a dog-lover and a human being who is not in a state of complete moral corruption, I can answer "a whole hell of a lot." Burress -- and I'm trying to think objectively -- was always much easier to forgive. I don't need to convince anyone that painfully murdering dogs, among other things, is more unforgivable than shooting one's self in the leg. I know that morality paints only a part of the picture, but I can't look at Vick and see anything but a monster. I spent most of my life purposefully not loving, or liking, or acquainting with, anyone I deemed capable of these acts or their equivalents.

On a more concrete, practical basis, the only thing Plax did wrong according to the law was carrying a gun in a state in which it was unregistered. Now, depending on where we're positioned on the political spectrum, we all have different opinions on handgun laws, but most people wouldn't consider this that egregious of a crime. Yet Plaxico got 2 years in a maximum security prison, his petition to delay sentencing until after the birth of his daughter was denied, and the same for his petition to transfer the sentence to house arrest due to good behavior was denied -- the proverbial book was thrown at him. By its nature this punishment was one of general deterrence -- it was meant to make a point to the general public that if you carry an unregistered weapon, it will ruin your life. What purpose did Vick's punishment serve? Was it general deterrence? I don't think you can say that it was because his sentence was mostly for the fact that he was bankrolling a huge dogfighting ring. That the public can afford to do this very thing is not much of a concern. Was it some sort of retribution? I don't know. I don't. I don't think the punishment fit the crime, but others might disagree. Was it to rehabilitate Vick -- in other words to make the streets safer for dogs? Even if that were so, the purpose of preventing further transgressions contemplates the notion that Vick never would've changed on his own accord, and does nothing to atone for his past actions. This all serves to explain how I can seemingly love Plax unconditionally, while hating Vick with the same passion.

The ESPN excerpted several statements made by Plax in his interview with Men's Journal. Several of which detailed his personal, emotional account of his jail time. Regarding the strain his imprisonment put on his family:

"I told her, 'Stop sending pictures because they eat me up so much.' Me and her were arguing on the phone each day, 'cause I was locked down in a lot of pain, and she's in pain about her life outside, being alone with a kid and seven months pregnant," Burress told Men's Journal. "Then at chow, these white officers are yelling, 'You black mother------! You stupid f------ dumbass: You're finished!' It was the lowest point ever in my life."

If anyone needs a reason to hate the authorities, let this be one. It's obvious that it was horrible for his pregnant wife and son too. I put this quote first though because it serves as a good foundation to the rest of this post which seeks to justify the resounding bitterness throughout the excerpted interview.

In jail, "they treated me like a f------ axe murderer. 23-hour lockdown, noncontact visiting, and only a Bible to read," Burress said. "Nobody deserves to live like that, man."

Really? 23-hour lockdown? Only a Bible? I know, I know, it's jail! It is supposed to be horrible! But I can't help but think about other criminals who've ruined lives getting far superior treatment. A man shoots himself, by accident, yet he can't hug his kids because the gun was registered in a different state?

Presumably Burress then really opened up about what else was grinding his gears. Regarding the heat he took for not practicing during the Giants' Super Bowl season:

"It was hurtful that they didn't have the courage (after the season) to admit they told me not to practice all year, they let the media tear me apart, saying I was dogging practice, that I wasn't a team player, all this sh--. The players thought I was pissing on 'em, and coach Coughlin hated it because he was out of the loop: The orders came from upstairs."

The response to this seems to be "tough shit, deal with it." Personally though, I can relate. Let me explain: I've had a lot of shit pile on recently, over the course of a few months. My aunt died unexpectedly; I cut off the tip of my pinky (although it is an unimportant digit and a 4-week old injury, it still requires a large bandage which prevents me from doing a lot of things requiring any semblance of precision. I also can't exercise or the increased blood flow will increase both the healing time and the chance for infection); my financial aid money never came through (although I was assured several times there would be no problem, it still might take another month before I get the loan. I am currently trying to get through law school without the money to afford books); and I was very sick on my birthday this past Tuesday. During this stretch, my brain started to notice and amplify EVERYTHING that didn't go my way. I started to think "If only this thing went better than it did, or this person did this," I would feel at least a little better. So I can at least understand the pervading sense of bitterness and cynicism illustrated by Plax's quotes about receiving hate-mail:

"I was a human pincushion; they were like, 'Yeah, we finally got you, mother------'" he said. "On the cover of the New York Post, it said 'GIANT IDIOT!' and I'm thinking, 'Damn, I went and gave 'em what they wanted. I'm just another gun-toting, famous black athlete.' "

The realization of his mistake though, apparent in the last sentence, segues nicely into the next quote:

"I was an edge-goer at times, running the streets and living life and not spending time with my family, or taking risks and not thinking about the consequences, which gave them the chance to take me down."

Plaxico goes on to talk about Eli:

"I was always his biggest supporter, even days he wasn't on, 'cause I could sense he didn't have thick skin," Burress said. "Then I went away, and I thought he would come see me, but nothing, not a letter, in two years. I don't want to say it was a slap in the face, but I thought our relationship was better than that."

Listen, you won't find a bigger Eli supporter and fan than myself. I don't know him personally, but I think it's somewhat impossible to say he doesn't have thick skin. Other than that, I don't think anything about this is a "rip" on Eli, as ESPN so deliberately puts it. These are the words of a man who was hurt by the fact that someone he considered a friend didn't visit, or even contact him during the lowest point in his life. I am lucky enough to have a very close-knit group of friends. Neither the group nor any of the individual relationships would have this same dynamic if I thought that any of them wouldn't be there for me when I needed a friend the most. If I hit bottom, and any of them weren't there for me, it would hurt. Given an audience, I would probably let it be known too.

Burress does get a little petty, to the point of whiny in his comments about Coach Coughlin:

"I'm like, forget support -- how about some concern? I did just have a bullet in my leg. And then I sat in his office, and he pushed back his chair and goes, 'I'm glad you didn't kill anybody!' Man, we're paid too much to be treated like kids. He doesn't realize that we're grown men and actually have kids of our own."

"He's not a real positive coach, you look around the league, the Raheem Morrises and Rex Ryans -- when their player makes a mistake, they take 'em to the side and say, 'We'll get 'em next time.' But Coughlin's on the sideline going crazy, man. I can't remember one time when he tried to talk a player through not having a day he was having."

This seems like definite venting, but again, not a "rip." Any attempt to classify the comments as such is a thinly-veiled attempt to inject drama into a situation where there is none. Everyone knows Coughlin's coaching style, and I don't think these comments change anything. A lot of it is just stating unsurprising facts.

There are plenty of acceptable reactions to reading the ESPN article, or the full article in Men's Journal. Those of you who, at first glance, thought Plaxico was simply a whiny bitch, I urge to think in context and make an attempt to relate. It wasn't hard for me.

I entreat you to see, and appreciate, the abject honesty behind these comments. This isn't the same old "athlete says stupid things without thinking" interview. Plaxico has thought about these words, he has had plenty of time to do nothing but think these thoughts. He has said them, and now we can all move on. Sometimes, as a person, you have to say things for your own good, even if there is no identifiable "good" that follows. Plax said it best himself:

"For me, there just comes a time when you want to get things off your chest and you just speak about it at that time and put it behind you."

Have a great weekend,

Carm

NFL 2011: Aaron Rodgers' 6-Month Pole-Greasing

Disclaimer: I have almost never been right about anything. Almost. The only things I have ever been right about were predictions made with my heart and not my head, so disregard any upcoming sentence that appears well thought out.

Disclaimer 2: I consider that Mega NFL Preview on Grantland to be asinine. Almost every prediction was based on a system the thrust of which was that good luck only begets bad luck and vice versa.

I did not care at all about the lockout. Granted, I didn't want an 18-game schedule -- I loathed the thought. But I would've sucked it up like Joe Buck on Aaron Rodgers' cock. I didn't care about the preseason, and I never do. Seeing a starting QB go 1-4 for 4 yds doesn't tell me he is going to have a shitty year. But lo and behold, when the regular season starts, I geek out. Any asinine opinion or story, rehashed countlessly though it is, becomes worth my time. The football erection that ESPN tries to force down my throat in July is suddenly gobbled with delight. Consider what follows to be me sharing the load...

AFC EAST

1. New York Jets: 11-5

I picked the Jets to beat the Pats in the playoffs last year (an example of thinking with my heart and not my head -- I hate the Patriots and my brother is a Jets fan so I'd like to see him have his day in the sun). Similarly, I pick them to win the division this year. I think the X-Factor is the polarizing Rex Ryan. Though he might hail from Clowntown, he always has his team ready to punch the Pats in the mouth, whereas the Bradys and Belichicks of the world seem to be at a mental impasse between a desire to appear outwardly professional and an inner hatred of the Jets.

I won't base the prediction entirely on the intangibles. The back-to-back AFC Championship games will have a positive effect on the Jets and many of their young, developing players. The addition of possession receivers Burress and Mason should help Mark Sanchez' completion percentage while Santonio Holmes will continue to bring playmaking ability to the table. The key to their season will be the running game. A moderately successful running game, combined with the presence of confident 3rd down receivers, and a terrific defense, is a recipe for success.

2. New England Patriots: 11-5

2 words: Cop Out. I just spent 2 excruciating attempts at paragraphs explaining why the Jets will be better than the Pats only to have them finish with the same record. Both teams have fairly easy schedules and I expect both to be playoff teams. I gave the Jets the edge because (1) I think they have the head-to-head advantage, (2) Tom Brady is a pussy, and (3) seriously, the Pats offensive dominance has to wane some time, right?

Although the Pats have seemingly run the same basic offense for years, they become very hard to plan for because of the unpredictability in the ways they use personnel. Looking at their defense, if the risk of acquiring Haynesworth pays off, I may be extremely underestimating this team. However, as much as it would delight me to hear a patented Carl Sylvester rant, I don't see that happening. Once a player checks out, he checks out. I equate Haynesworth to someone on unemployment, he will do just enough to keep getting those checks, but no one in their right mind will consider him a success. Defenses don't hinge on 1 player, but a top-shape Haynesworth in a 3-man line next to Vince Wilfork would give opposing offenses something to think about besides "Can we keep up with Tom Brady & Co.?"

3. Miami Dolphins: 8-8

Is Chad Henne really so bad that an entire fan base is too disgusted to show him any support? Great quarterbacks are REALLY hard to come by, as Dolphins fans must know. This is a list of the Dolphins' starting QBs this century: Jay Fiedler, Damon Huard, Ray Lucas, Brian Griese, A.J. Feeley, Sage Rosenfels, Gus Frerotte, Joey Harrington, Duante Culpepper, Cleo Lemon, Trent Green, John Beck, Chad Pennington, Tyler Thigpen. And yet it is downright despicable that the team endure one more year moment of Chad Henne? Fine, Henne has looked bad at times, really bad, with really no indication that he can be a star save for one dynamite performance against the Jets in his first year as starter. But he has done enough to deserve a 3rd go-round as starter for a team with expectations that are middling regardless of whether their QB's jersey says Henne, or Orton, or Moore, or Beck or whoever could've realistically been theirs this season. On the other hand I can see why the Dolphins fans are done with him. I expect Henne to improve just enough this season to compel the previous paragraph to preview the 2012 season as well.

Bottom Line: I look at the Dolphins and I see a team with an above-average defense and O-line. I think they can go 8-8 in what seems like a watered-down AFC this year.

4. Buffalo Bills: 2-14

How has this team been so bad for so long and still have no upside? Pathetic. None of us can imagine what it must be like to be a Bills fan, where no one in the organization gives a fuck.

AFC NORTH

1. Baltimore Ravens: 12-4

Another thing I won't understand about the plethora of previews I've read is why everyone is so sure the Ravens will regress. Granted their defense is older, but does that necessarily mean it's much worse? So long as the defense doesn't suck, it should confound the offenses of the Manning-less Colts, the Jaguars, the Browns twice, the Bengals twice, the Seahawks, the 49ers, the Cardinals, the Rams.

Granted, the O-line looks a bit worse. The Ravens astutely brought in the best blocking fullback in the league as reinforcement. I expect to see Flacco improve, and Anquan Boldin to improve on what was by far his worst year. Both of those things would give Ray Rice some running room off the handoff and in the passing game.

Spoiler Alert: I pick the Steelers to finish with the same record. I chose the Ravens to finish first because I think the levee will break (sorry New Orleans) and all those close losses against Pittsburgh will finally start turning into wins. The Ravens looked like the better team in the playoff matchup this year, and I think 1 team improved and the other remained the same.

2. Pittsburgh Steelers: 12-4

The schedule is just too easy.

I hate this team. Why? Let's make an analogy... start with a lovable but stern black patriarch (Tomlin), then add a self-righteous, humility-faking, media-darling rapist (Roethlisberger), and mix-in a whining, drama-queen, who nonetheless can back up his bullshit (Harrison). It would be like if Fresh Prince of Bel Air still had Uncle Phil but replaced Will and Geoffrey with Kobe Bryant and Russell Crowe... a ratings firestorm that everyone hated.

Side-note: Is it possible I hate Big Ben because he twice got away with something that I would've gotten a life-sentence for? I got in more trouble in college for listening to music at a normal volume.

Anyway, enjoy:



3. Cleveland Browns: 6-10

Sorry, I'm not buying. I'm prepared to eat crow, but Colt McCoy and Peyton Hillis as a 1-2 punch for a playoff team? I'll choose to believe it when I see it.

This is a team that has a 2011 bandwagon merely because it looked kinda good at times last season a little, maybe? Every time a young quarterback doesn't suck, everyone seems to expect him to make huge strides his second season, when that is almost never the case. My point is this team was 5-11 last year, and Peyton Hillis had a Brady Anderson-esque anomaly of a year. Where does this team gain more than 1 win?

4. Cincinnati Bengals: 5-11

Why commit more than 2 minutes to this insanely bad yet probably not quite as bad as everyone thinks team?

AFC SOUTH

1. Tennessee Titans: 10-6

No team seems to ebb and flow more seamlessly than the Titans. I think this is simple really: the defense is good enough to be the best in the division (not a compliment), and the addition of Hasselbeck is actually an improvement over the Young/Collins/Rusty trifecta.

2. Houston Texans: 8-8

The Texans finished 6-10 last year. Many "experts" are picking them as a possible top seed in the AFC this year. Why? The Texans finished 6-10 last year. Keep in mind Arian Foster had a year that has to be considered great by historical standards.

The Texans need A LOT of pieces to fall into place. Namely, Arian Foster needs to repeat with another career year and Matt Schaub needs to prove that he hasn't already hit his ceiling (a very real possibility). Next, they need a marked defensive improvement. There, they are relying heavily on innovations made by Wade Phillips. Ask the Cowboys, Bills, Chargers, Eagles, and Broncos... Wade Phillips is no Anne Sullivan (but then again who is? Do you have any idea how fucking hard it is to teach a deaf and blind Alabamian to understand anything, let alone how to form cogent sentences? But I digress...)

3. Indianapolis Colts: 7-9

I am thoroughly convinced Peyton Manning is EVERYTHING to this team. I'm also convinced that every single person in the Colts organization knows it. Without Peyton, this simply is not a winning team.

4. Jacksonville Jaguars: 5-11

I think I'm being generous here. I'm not sure but I think a Dolphins fan would murder a child to have David Garrard behind center. The Jaguars are like a fat guy who dumps his decent-looking girlfriend because he wants to do other chicks. Neither are getting anywhere.

AFC WEST

1. San Diego Chargers: 10-6

With the Chargers, it's same old, same old. They will put up great stats on both sides of the ball, make the playoffs despite underachieving early in the year, Philip Rivers will wear that douchey face and be a fucking petulant dick goddamnit I hate him I hate him... err... and they will not put up any serious fight in the playoffs.

I don't see any good reason why this is their year.

2. Oakland Raiders: 7-9

Your welcome Matt. I won't waste much breath with the rest of the AFC West. All 3 teams seem to be going in the right direction, but none have too high a ceiling.

3. Kansas City Chiefs: 7-9

I love Jamaal Charles, but I believe opposing defenses will be stacking the box and daring him to run. I don't believe in Matt Cassel, not in the slightest.

4. Denver Broncos: 6-10

This team would probably be 2-14 if Tebow started...

NFC EAST

1. Dallas Cowboys: 11-5

I normally wouldn't put stock in a team whose season is riding on a lot of ifs. For instance, if the offensive line holds up, Romo could have a great year. If Dez Bryant, Felix Jones, and Romo stay healthy, this offense could be electric. If Felix Jones can shake his head-scratching performance form last year, he could be a top back. Well, let's just call it a hunch that things will go their way.

And let's call a full season without Wade Phillips addition by subtraction.

2. Philadelphia Eagles: 10-6

I wanted, I mean really wanted, to keep the Eagles out of the playoffs. I wanted to burst their bubble. I want to say this season will end like many others; in disappointment and a realization that their city sucks. But I just think they get 10 wins out of this season.

I think Vick will be great at times, good at times, shitty at times, injured at times, and a dog-murderer always. That's not really taking much of a stance, but there's this: I'll believe Vick as a Super Bowl QB only when I see it.

3. New York Giants: 8-8

Say they were to make the playoffs somehow... could they even field a team? This preseason has presented the Giants with one obstacle after the next. Their running game should be among the best in the league, or at least good enough to open up the passing game. I am not concerned about the changes along the O-line. Frankly, their line was old and injury prone. It is nice to see some young blood -- especially in what is turning out to be somewhat of a transition year.

It is the Giants' defense that really bears the brunt of the preseason losses. Due to 3 season-ending injuries in the secondary, Aaron Ross went from the bubble to the starting lineup in a matter of days. The Giants will suit up several cornerbacks and linebackers who had no plans of playing in the NFL this year. The pass-rush should be terrific, barring injury, but will have to be virtually perfect to defeat teams that spread the ball like the Saints, Packers, and Pats (all of whom play the Giants this season).

4. Washington Redskins: 5-11

The Redskins line up a very solid defense. But what startles me is the astounding lack of playmakers on offense. I'm sure, by now, that the DC area is convinced Tim Hightower is the second-coming of Marshall Faulk and once John Beck steps in as starter in Week 4 the team will never lose again, but this offense is really, really bad.

NFC NORTH

1. Green Bay Packers: 13-3

I am slobbin' that Kool-Aid big time. Now that they've crossed the Saints of their schedule, there remains few games that should be challenging. I don't think anyone disagrees. When I watch them I am amazed at how deep they are offensively. The only real prediction is how much each and every one of us will hate this team before the national media can even wipe their chins.

2. Minnesota Vikings: 9-7

Last year this team was 6-10 with a leprosy-infected Brett Favre, Tavaris Jackson, and Joe Webb at QB. I can't help but take the bait and say McNabb is an upgrade. Can it be that simple? Is it naive to think that the way Shanahan, and Reid before him, stomped all over McNabb's mind-grapes will beget a more calm, confident McNabb? (albeit with clearly diminished capacities). Is it petty to hope McNabb plays great if not just to see how the Philadelphia/Washington fanbases react?

Anyway, I don't see any reason to think that AP won't have another stellar year, and I have a feeling about Percy Harvin this year. The defense looks, well pretty piss-poor; but it's not like I'm predicting the Vikes to set the world aflame.

3. Chicago Bears: 7-9

Jay Cutler sucks.

4. Detroit Lions: 6-10

Do you remember how many years people were saying "this is the year the Arizona Cardinals make the playoffs" before it actually happened? It was clear that the team was moving in the right direction, but every year they just seemed to fall flat. That's how I feel about the Lions. It is clear that they are finally making smart moves after the patio-turd that was the Matt Millen era. I just don't think that they're there yet. At no point last year, even at their best, did I say to myself "hmmm this looks like a playoff team." I like Matt Stafford, but he would have to make a HUGE leap for this team to be a contender.

NFC SOUTH

1. Atlanta Falcons: 12-4

I don't buy Julio Jones as an immediate game-changing presence, BUT, playmaking wide-receiver was a hole that the Falcons did their best to fill. Otherwise, I don't think the Falcons got any better or worse than last year -- which is certainly not a bad thing considering they were the #1 overall seed in the NFC.

I love the Falcons' slow-pounding style (and I've used it several times myself). It has actually become quite unique in an increasingly pass-heavy league. There are simply very few answers for a team that can consistently sustain 6, 7, 8 minute drives. If the Falcons can improve defensively, they will be a powerhouse.

2. New Orleans Saints: 11-5

This division will quite likely come down to the December 26th Falcons-Saints game, and I'm going with the Falcons. The Saints looked damn good last night, but both teams agreed pregame to not play defense. I think the Falcons win a dogfight against most teams, Saints included.

Side-note: I love Mark Ingram. I wanted the Giants to draft him despite RB not being a major need. He will be electrifying in the NFL, but I don't think he will break out this year. If he does, the rest of the league should take notice.

3. Tampa Bay Buccaneers: 8-8

A 2-game dip in the standings wouldn't necessarily be a regression, and I don't consider it so. The Bucs' 10 wins last year came against the Panthers (2x), the Browns, the Bengals, the Rams, the Cards, the 49ers, the Redskins, the Seahawks and the Saints (in week 17 after they clinched the 5-seed). Those were 10 bad teams.

I like the offensive core the Bucs have put together, but I'm not sure that I love them. I'd like to feel those guys up, I mean out, out, for a year before I decide if they're winners or losers.

4. Carolina Panthers: 4-12

Think of the '08 or '09 Chiefs. I.E.: A team that loses a lot of close games.

NFC WEST

1. St. Louis Rams: 9-7

In Spags I trust. I'm not a believer in this team. I just think they're the best of a bad bunch. Think of an average girl who surrounds herself with butt-ugly friends.

2. Arizona Cardinals: 7-9

Take it from me: Beanie Wells is terrible. He showed not one flash of brilliance last season. Also, I can't pick a team to win a division if their fanbase is excited to have Kevin Kolb on board.

3. Seattle Seahawks: 6-10

The team will start 1-10 before an earthquake destroys their home stadium as well as most of metro Seattle and the nation gets behind the team, which leads to a 5-game win streak and the feel-good sports story of the year. Guaranteed.

4. San Francisco 49ers: 4-12

No seriously guys, this is the year Alex Smith puts it all together.

PLAYOFFS

AFC WILD-CARD ROUND

5. Steelers over 4. Titans
3. Chargers over 6. Patriots

NFC WILD-CARD ROUND

3. Cowboys over 6. Eagles
5. Saints over 4. Rams

AFC DIVISIONAL ROUND

1. Ravens over 5. Steelers
2. Jets over 3. Chargers

NFC DIVISIONAL ROUND

1. Packers over 5. Saints
2. Falcons over 3. Cowboys

AFC CHAMPIONSHIP

1. Ravens over 2. Jets

NFC CHAMPIONSHIP

1. Packers over 2. Falcons

SUPER BOWL

Packers 30 - Ravens 16