First the Red Sox, Then the Cubs

If only us Cubs fans knew what this feeling of anticipation was like, being up 3-0 going into Game 4, knowing the Curt Schilling and Pedro Martinez are available for later starts if necessary. I suppose this would be like starting Greg Maddux in Game 4 of next year's world Series knowing that Mark Prior, Kerry Wood, and Carlos Zambrano were available for the next three games if the Cubs lost. Next year might be it; I for one fully expect a healthy and dominant Prior and Wood for 35 starts each.

In any event, I keep reading the Cardinal players bitching about not having home-field advantage for the Series. I read some particularly inane quote from Ray King (a former Cub, by the way) saying that the team with the best record shouldn't be penalized. Memo to Mr. King and all the other morons who think the winner of the All-Star game shouldn't be given home-field advantage: WORLD SERIES HOME-FIELD HAS NEVER BEEN GIVEN TO THE TEAM WITH THE BEST RECORD. I find it amazing that everyone complaining about how the All-Star Game decides home-field conveniently overlooks the fact that Major League Baseball didn't exactly have the best method before 2003: they alternated between AL and NL. That's right, the reason the Diamondbacks won Game 7 at home in 2001 was because that was the NL's year to have home-field. That's it. And had MLB kept that system, the Red Sox would still have home-field, because the Angels had it in 2002 and the Marlins should have had it last year. Whether you like the All-Star game solution or not, at least the players are deciding it on the field. The reason nobody noticed the old system was because it seemed like the best team had home-field when it was really just coincidence.

And let us not overlook the ex-Cub factor in the playoffs, which says that the team with the most ex-Cubs loses. The Yankees' collapse can be somewhat explained by the fact that Miguel Cairo (!) was their starting second baseman, Jon Lieber was one of their big starters, and Tanyon Sturtze, Felix Heredia, and Tom Gordon were in their bullpen. Five ex-Cubs is just too many. The Cardinals have Tony Womack, Julian Tavarez, and the aforementioned King. The Red Sox are stuck with only Mark Bellhorn. Coincidences? You be the judge. (For the record, I can't think of any ex-Cubs on the Astros...thinking...wait, that's right, Jose Vizcaino is one. I think that's it.)

Time to recap Week 7. I have the feeling that I went 7-7 in both picks, but let's see...

Bucs beat Bears by 12; got both. 1-0, 1-0
Ravens beat Bills by 14; missed the spread but picked Baltimore to win. 1-1, 2-0
Lions beat Giants by 15; missed both. 1-2, 2-1
Eagles beat Browns by 3; missed the spread but picked Philly to win. 1-3, 3-1
Jags beat Colts by 3; got the spread but picked Indy to win. 2-3, 3-2
Vikings beat Titans by 17; got both. 3-3, 4-2
Dolphins beat Rams by 17; got the spread but picked St. Louis to win. 4-3, 4-3
Chiefs beat Falcons by 46; got both. 5-3, 5-3
Patriots beat Jets by 6; missed the spread by one-half point but picked NE. 5-4, 6-3
Packers beat Cowboys by 21; got both. 6-4, 7-3
Cardinals beat Seahawks by 8; got the spread but picked Seattle to win. 7-4, 7-4
Saints beat Raiders by 5; missed both. 7-5, 7-5
Bengals beat Broncos by 13; missed both. 7-6, 7-6

And the lock of the week: Chargers beat Panthers by 11; you're damn right. 8-6, 8-6

I knew this week would end up being a pain in the ass, and I was right.

Records through Week 7: 53-46-3 ATS, 64-38 straight up, 2-0 lock of the week.