This won't happen

but if the 49ers trade up and select Tavon Austin, I will run naked screaming through the snow that is still on the ground where I live.

Schedule

So the 2013 schedule is out. One thing jumped out at me: the 49ers have exactly 2 games starting at 10 AM Pacific time. 5 Prime-time games, and only 2 games scheduled on the eastern seaboard add up to 14 games starting either at night or at a normal time. That is fantastic. Looking at the strength of the opponents never means anything at this time of year, but seeing that only 2 of their games are starting early is something that actually makes a difference. Oh, and those 2 early starts are against the Jags and Bucs. Again, maybe those teams will be better this season, but I'd certainly rather that than, say, the Pats and Falcons or something.

Rooting for a good team pays off sometimes.

Off-season check in vol 1- The One Where I Bitch About the Media (again)

Hey guys, I don't know if you've heard, but there's an ARMS RACE IN THE NFC WEST!! It's NUCLEAR!

Here's what I want to know: do these guys all get together in a room and decide on what the narrative is going to be? Do they not know that doing a simple google search for "NFC West arms race" would return hits from websites spanning the US from Seattle to LA to Florida to Minnesota to New York? Do they not care? Are they really that lazy?

If I was getting paid to write, I would really feel an obligation to give my readers their money's worth. I would feel like I needed to approach a story from an angle that few people thought of. What I wouldn't do write something that a person could read literally ANYWHERE ELSE on the internet, or see on any channel on TV, or in any newspaper. What's the point? Why write anything at all if you're going to write the exact same story that everyone else has already thought of?

I'm probably breaking my own rule here: anyone who's not *in* the media makes hay bashing the way the media operates. I may not be bringing anything new to the table with this argument, but I'm not getting PAID TO WRITE ABOUT THIS. And yet my style mimics those who are. If I were a musician, and some dummy in the middle of North Dakota could sit at his laptop and imitate me to the note, that would be slightly unsettling. That's not the case, though. As badly as I want to, I can't sound as good as Ben Gibbard, because he's more talented than I am. I don't feel like any writer writing any article on the NFC West "arms race" is doing something that I couldn't do. And I'm a moron. That's really frustrating.

Apart from the fact that they're all writing the same thing, there's also the little matter of that same thing being WRONG. Every. Single. Year. How many teams who participate in "arms races" in the off-season win Super Bowls? Or even make the playoffs? Let's quickly calculate the big off-season spenders in Free Agency the last few years:

2012: Bills. Bills record last season: 6-10 (missed playoffs)

2011: Eagles. We know how that went: 8-8 (missed playoffs)

2010: Bears, Dolphins. Records that season: 11-5 (lost in NFC Champ), 7-9 (missed playoffs)\

2009: Redskins. Record: 4-12 (missed playoffs)

1 playoff team in the last 4 years. That Bears team was the outlier. That's what facts tell us. But you know what the stories were in each of those off-seasons? There was no restraint to be found. Each of those big-spending teams were automatic division-winners, Super Bowl favorites.

At what point does big spending cease to be a story? Is there any less of a story in criticizing these moves? Why is there no reasonable voice out in the mainstream saying "yes, this team is spending a lot of money and is getting players that at first glance make their team a lot better, but there is very little track record of this strategy actually working in recent history". I would find that interesting if I didn't already know it. Maybe it would temper my expectations if I were a fan of a team that was free spending. Maybe it would make me a little more well-informed about the decisions I want my team making.

This season the NFL has finally figured it out- Super Bowls are not won by writing big checks in February. The Dolphins and Vikings are going to find that out the hard way- the vast majority of the NFL is already on board with this, but still the stories persist. The Seahawks and 49ers are extremely smart, competitive teams who are making very very good decisions this season- adding value while not sacrificing their long-term outlook.

That would be an interesting story. But what is the story? "IT'S AN ARMS RACE! WOW LOOK SHINY SHINY TOYS WOW!!!". The media collectively is the dog from "Up", unable to focus on anything but the simplest angle to any story. Not willing to burn a single calorie to approach the story from a different viewpoint. Trading for Anquan Boldin isn't a smart move that gives the 49ers what they were missing last season, it's a response to the Seahawks getting Harvin. The 49ers don't care about getting better, they care about one-upping their rival. The Seahawks only signed Winfield because the 49ers got Nnamdi. It's certainly not because they want to make their defensive backfield one of the best in the league. Let's be sure to not analyze this from a position that make sense, but rather from one that makes us look like slobbering morons who are completely incapable of grasping even the simplest of strategic outlooks.

The whole thing makes me sick. It makes following sports a chore: you have to mute ESPN or NFLN for the segments between news and highlights because they are so loud wrong all the time. There is no value to their opinions. You have to slog through mountains of crap on the internet to find the guys who don't interject the bull crap narratives into everything they write. Consider this post my Peter Finch rant. I'm tired of this crap.

All that said, Nnamdi was a great signing. Pretty excited about him.