DR Z Picked The Colts

[Boom_70]

Not a bad effort from the master:

The Patriots' defense would have unsettled Grossman more than the Colts' unit will, but New England's offense wouldn't have put as many points on the board as Indy will. The no-huddle will give the Bears trouble, if not right away then later in the game. Grossman may put up some numbers, depending on Indy corner Nick Harper's health (he missed the last three quarters on Sunday with an ankle injury), and Chicago will do a bit of damage on the ground. But I don't see the Bears matching the Colts' scoring machine. Indy will pass early, run late. COLTS 34, BEARS 24

 

[Mizzougrad96]

He also picked the Bills four years in a row...

 

[slappy4428]

The Dwarf picked the Colts too... that make him ****ing Kreskin? ;D

 

[GB-Hack]

The Dwarf picked the Colts too... that make him ****ing Kreskin? ;D

Yes ;D

 

[Montezuma's Revenge]

Yeah, huge limb picking the Colts. How did he see that coming?

 

[bigpern23]

I picked the Colts too. Unfortunately, the guy I place bets with wasn't sold on what a momentous and rare pick it was to let me slide on the over I parlayed it with.

 

[2muchcoffeeman]

The Dwarf picked the Colts too... that make him ****ing Kreskin? ;D

If he's ****ing Kreskin, that's his business.

 

[slappy4428]

The Dwarf picked the Colts too... that make him ****ing Kreskin? ;D

Yes ;D

Oh. Allrighty then.

 

[wickedwritah]

The Dwarf picked the Colts too... that make him ****ing Kreskin? ;D

If he's ****ing Kreskin, that's his business.

But he guessed correctly that Mo Pete was going to be in St. Louis for the Final Four!

Oh, wait a minute ...

 

[Del_B_Vista]

I picked Colts 21, Bears 10 in the paper, so I woulda won on the spread (and TPIR) and on the under if I were an inveterate gamblerput money on the game.

 

[Cousin Jeffrey]

Dr. Z has been down this year so it was a good pick by him, with good reasoning to support it. Then again nearly everyone on espndotcom picked the Colts too. Except for Simmons, who had about the exact same score/MVP that I did, unfortunately (for me).

 

[D-Backs Hack]

Zimmerman has had my respect since 1986, when he was perfect in SI's NFL preview issue.

All six division winners, all four wild cards. Nailed 'em.

And picked the Giants to beat the Broncos in the Super Bowl.

 

[Oz]

Zimmerman has had my respect since 1986, when he was perfect in SI's NFL preview issue.

All six division winners, all four wild cards. Nailed 'em.

And picked the Giants to beat the Broncos in the Super Bowl.

That ought to earn anyone's respect. Imagine someone doing that nowadays. Just won't happen.

 

[Columbo]

Zimmerman has had my respect since 1986, when he was perfect in SI's NFL preview issue.

All six division winners, all four wild cards. Nailed 'em.

And picked the Giants to beat the Broncos in the Super Bowl.

The Giants over Broncos prediction on the cover has stuck with me, as well.

I hadn't recalled his picking all the other teams right.

 

[Boom_70]

At risk of sounding like I am head of DR Z fan club here is link to best analysis of SB that I have read. As bonus he give a dig to Miami Herald lead columnist ( Dan LeBartard?)

Sadly its the type of writing that apparently the masses don't want but its certainly what the hard core football fan wants. Solid analysis written by someone who understands the game.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/dr_z/02/06/analysis/index.html

 

[Oz]

Thanks for the link, I had been looking for it but never found it. He's the best read when it comes to the NFL.

 

[Boom_70]

Here is Dr' Z's little dig at the Herald:

If I were a selector, I might have voted for Addai as MVP, but Manning, with all the ups and downs he's had, was a better story, a sentimental choice for the award. The lead sports columnist in Monday's Miami Herald wrote a piece in which Manning was mentioned 21 times, Addai not once. A sidebar on the game had a 16-1 ratio. Sentiment wins at Super Bowl time.

 

[BTExpress]

The lead sports columnist in Monday's Miami Herald wrote a piece in which Manning was mentioned 21 times, Addai not once. A sidebar on the game had a 16-1 ratio.

That's a silly observation.

The lead column was a "gentlemen win" angle highlighting Dungy and Manning. Of course Manning was mentioned 21 times and Addai zero.

"A sidebar on the game" happened to be . . . a Manning sidebar.

It was one of several sidebars.

"Another sidebar" was on the offense. It mentioned Manning exactly . . . once.

 

[Cousin Jeffrey]

Dr. Z said today he's off the mag for 6 months at half-pay, presumably in line with the cuts. Though he doesn't do anything in the mag (still on si.com) aside from his picks and NFL previews and sidebars anymore anyway, so it's no loss.

 

[Webster]

Dr. Z said today he's off the mag for 6 months at half-pay, presumably in line with the cuts. Though he doesn't do anything in the mag (still on si.com) aside from his picks and NFL previews and sidebars anymore anyway, so it's no loss.

I thought that he was writing a book.