23 girls 4 cups?

Bokolis decided to wait until all the afterglow simmered down to talk some shit about the US Women's National Team running out winners of its fourth world championship.  Despite any efforts to sidestep the noise, I've had to endure the nonsense of those who think the women should be paid more than their male parallels, and of those who think they are being edgy in using '90s references to insinuate that each practice ends in a daisy chain.

Still others have thumbed their noses by bringing up that, a couple of years back, the side lost a scrimmage against a FC Dallas under-15* side by some distance.  This gets met with some broad straight out of Dave Lozo's GSF academy coming through with the they weren't really trying excuse, and allusions to insecure men who would dare bring this up, as if a victory against 15-year old American boys is supposed to be groundbreaking.

Aside- they call it under-15, but it should more properly called '15 and under.'

No, whether elite US women footballers win or lose a scrimmage against a u-15 side is not relevant.  Bokolis hasn't seen any footage, and I imagine it has been burned or locked away.  We don't know at what levels the sides were playing.  It is reasonable enough to speculate that they boys were going at 90%-100% and the women were going at 70%.

It is far more damning that they would have to go that far down the latrine to find a pace of play and level of athletes that suits their preparation.  You see, if playing full bore, this USWNT could probably hang with a u-17 side, or u-18 side taking pity on them.  They've already learned that they can't practice against a serviceable college side because the male players can't figure out the appropriate amount of pity to take.

A side of 15-year old boys going virtually full-bore provides the women with a tolerable amount of physicality and speed against which they can practice.

Of course, 15 year old American boys aren't well-drilled footballers.  They largely rely on their athleticism.  This, of course, does nothing to help the women become better footballers.

And, Bokolis' issue with the assessment of this squad was that, while they had, far and away, the best athletes, this world cup showed quite clearly that they did not have the best footballers.  Sweden, England and the Netherlands all had better footballers.

Hey, jerk- the US beat all those teams!

In all those cases, their superior athleticism won out.  Against England, they also flat-out got lucky- lucky that VAR caught the offside despite England again splitting the US centre-halves after having done so on their lone official goal, lucky that the England women made like the England men when it came to taking a penalty.

That said, they were never threatened.  Bokolis thought Alex Morgan stumbled onto brilliance with the tea-sipping display, but the raised pinky was bad form.

Sweden punted the group stage match, apparently trying to play possum in case of a possible meeting in the final.  The US clearly dictated the play, but had trouble producing any football capable of breaking down Sweden, and benefited from the dodgy new-age offside interpretations on the second goal.

By the time of the final, it should have been abundantly clear that the Netherlands had no shot of standing up to the superior US athleticism.  Nonetheless, it took a dodgy VAR penalty decision for a foul on Alex Morgan, who had been diving/embellishing all tournament, to break the ice.  Bokolis immediately dismissed this in real time, even as I quickly texted my group that, sooner or later, this diving dishrag was going to get one of these calls.  Sure enough, here came the prompt to re-referee the game.  I also told my friends that I would bet one of my testicles that Rapinoe was going to her right on the PK.  How the Dutch keeper didn't deduce the same is beyond me.

The second goal was legitimate, and took advantage of what should have been the glaring liability in the Dutch side, the centre-half wearing the number 3 jersey.  She was exposed in the Japan game, and this should've been known.  The US should've piled on about four more.

Bokolis must admit that I had no prior knowledge of the Dutch side, much less that they won the latest Euro.  I immediately noticed that they all played like they thought they were Dennis Bergkamp.  Of course, they bunkered up once the competition got better, which reinforced Bokolis perception that their best female athletes are still riding bicycles or speed skating, playing field hockey or whatever.

The Norwegians were better footballers, too.  But they didn't measure up athletically and weren't deep.  They had nothing left for England.  Bokolis will leave out Germany, as this was not even close to a proper German side.

Spain were not better footballers but, thanks to their tactics, the US did nothing from open play.  They won two penalties, one on an excellent embellishment by the only proper footballer on the US (Tobin Heath), and a dodgy one on what was a straight-up dive, and a bad one at that.

Perhaps it wasn't surprising that their best performance was against France, who had the most similar squad makeup, enabling the US women to press their athletic superiority against a side who weren't necessarily better footballers and worse yet, were set up to rely on their athleticism to bully lesser sides.

Since Bokolis always says that Ligue 1 is MLS, but faster, I got a kick out of the females being similar.  France had two singularly unique players in winger Kadidiatou Diani and the giant centre-half Wendie Renard, players for whom the rest of the world had no answer.  To boot, the side was stocked with players from Olympique Lyonnais, which has won the women's Champions League four years running.

Like the Norwegians, the birds from Lyon also figured out that they might not be as good without Ada Hegerberg.  They tried to match the US athleticism, and they failed, big-time.

The new-age nonsense worked against the US in this game, as they had their third goal taken away because the VAR machine said a heel was in an offside position.  Get the fuck out of here!

Nonetheless, the US outplayed the French, and only conceded because the player wearing the number three jersey (Mewis) played the whole French team onside by dropping too early on the free kick.  The analysts neglected to bring up what was in their face, instead blaming it on Horan, who was apparently marking Renard but, like the rest of the team, trying to play the French offside.

To boot, those analysts didn't figure out to give Crystal Dunn credit for the job she did on Diani until after the match, by which time the whole world had already weighed in.  They hadn't done it at halftime, when Dunn had already plugged what, going into the match, seemed like the biggest liability.  It was all the more amazing because Dunn, playing out of position at left back, had shown herself (in prior matches) to be a naive defender, allowing herself to be pulled out of position in search of something to do.  Diani certainly had a few tricks up her sleeve to wrong-foot Dunn, Dunn's fight allowed her speed to hang with Diani.

The French were neutralized, and there was maybe one other person in the world who could have done that job as well as Dunn.  But the Velvet Mafia didn't want her on the squad because she wasn't feeling the rainbow, so Dunn got the chance, and gets all the plaudits.

Bokolis had a chuckle because her teammates seemed to refuse to pass Dunn the ball.  I wondered whether they didn't trust her, or they didn't want to give her too much to do.  Subsequent games suggested it was the latter.  But, hey, at least they let her play.

Bokolis would now give individual assessments of each player...would- but I don't want to break any ground.

You know the rest, lift the cup, parade in NYC, Rapinoe drops a few f-bombs while demanding equal pay (if not more) based on wild distortions of reality, a bunch of them dressed up like porn whores at the ESPYs- what's that?  It's their prerogative? Sure it is, just as it is Bokolis' to say they dressed up like porn whores- and now they'll go back to playing in front of 6,000 at their league matches while the rest of the world forgets about them until the next cycle.

No one can say this in the face of their distortions because they'll just shout it down as insecure men and patriarchal hate and all this other nonsense.  Bokolis will give them more credit than they deserve by calling it an attack of cognitive dissonance rather than than their own attempt to counter bullying with bullying.

You see, ladies, you can't get paid like the men because, while the footballing world is going to be locked in to every qualifier for ever major nation (and most middling and minor nations), the world is set to pick your plight back up in June 2023.  What's your next trick?

Cup runneth...dry?

So, it's the birds' turn to play football.  Said slightly more properly, it's the turn of the women to be in the bright lights for playing football.  The Women's World Cup is upon us.

Like the hockey women, the female footballers are whingeing about not being paid like the men for what they perceive to be the same work.  While Bokolis' cock-jerk reaction is to guffaw and to tell them to get paid like men, go earn like the men, I grudgingly admit that the issue might be a little more nuanced than that.

But, Bokolis will say that equal pay for equal work is bullshit.  Negotiations are all about leverage, which is a catchphrase that really means a side's ability to bully.  When you don't own the factors of production, your ability to bully is limited.

Bokolis will now dismiss the merits of their case.  I actually did some poking around on this.

The USWNT claims that because they do better than the men do in international competition, that entitles them to draw at least as much water as the men.  More accurately, they do comparatively better than the men.

This is because the US women have a relatively higher-level of athlete in their talent pool and because the US women had a head start on most of the world, certainly the nations that would be considered top among the men (Germany, England, France, Spain, Italy).  Germany caught up; France caught up; England and Spain are catching up; Italy haven't yet reconciled that women are allowed to be something other than mothers or whores, and the Dutch women seem to be committed elsewhere.  Others will eventually catch up, and the rankings of the US men and women will converge.

If the best male athletes in the US focused on (soccer) football, even with a lack of quality coaching, we would pound the rest of the world back into the dark ages, crushed as they would be that we took their sport away from them.  Ironically, that would do more for the women's game than anything the USWNT have ever done.

They do not do better than the men, as they do not play the same competition; they play against a talent pool that isn't as developed, or as deep.  Would you like us to take off the governor and put you in against men?  After enough ass-whuppings, at some point, evolution will smile on women and they'll be the physical equals of men.  Society would have broken down by then, and we'd probably have had an ice age or two, affording women even more chance to better their place in its reconstruction.  But that also presumes that women would have evolved to be the hunting equals of men- and equally adept at avoiding being the hunted- which is how we got the drop on them in the first place.

Before that, if we dropped the current USWNT into the fourth tier of English (Men's) Football- League Two- for a full season, they would most likely get relegated. Bokolis is told the league average wages (using 2017-18 figures, employ an inflation multiplier accordingly) is about 1000GBP/week, or 46000GBP ($60k USD, rounding up) per full season. Once they were relegated to the Conference National League, which straddles the line between full-time and semi-pro, wages figure to drop by 25%-35%. $40k-$45k/yr seem fair for you ladies?  Because, you would very likely be relegated from there, as well.  Bokolis is pretty sure that players in the 6th-tier of English football get paid more from their day jobs than from football.

On the basis of percentage of revenue generation, the failed leagues demonstrate that the women cannot draw anywhere near the men.  This is even the case in the US, where the WUSA, WPS, W-league, WPSL Elite have folded and the NWSL is still trying to gain traction.  All this, while MLS chugs along just fine, despite those guys being just a little better than Bokolis was.  At least in the US, the women's clubs function independently of the men's.  In Europe, the women's teams are typically arms of a larger (men's) club.

Sure, as revenue earners, the USWNT compares far better in relation to its male counterpart than does the rest of the world.  In the US, 'soccer' is perceived as the girls sport- that is, it is the sport females are best equipped to play.  Said another way, it is the sport we'd most prefer our girls to play.  You've got seventh-generation American fathers, who wouldn't be caught dead watching soccer, mindlessly putting their daughters into soccer because it seems like the thing to so.  This has been going on for a couple of generations and, as a consumer group, American women- despite what they tell you- have a standard of living suitable to support their national team.

"Girl Power" and all that notwithstanding, women in the rest of the world still prefer men's football to women's football.

As such, taken in total, the men's world cup cycle generates 40x-50x the revenue that the women's world cup cycle generates.  Said another way, for every billion that the men's game generates, the women's game generates $20-$25 million.  Nonetheless, the WC prize pool for women is already at a greater payout rate than for the men. This is actually understandable, as there are far greater carrying costs associated with the men, who are far more greatly valued assets.  If Sheikh Mansour puts in a bid for Alex Morgan- well, you've heard what happens on those yachts- whatever he pays is barely going to eat into what City will get by selling Leroy Sané back to a German side.

The players suffer further humiliation by having the lords of the game- and a few other chauvinists-  suggest that they'd be more of a draw if they played in revealing, form-fitting and otherwise more suggestive outfits.  Does it need to be said that this could also be harmful, even dangerous?  The fucked up thing is, as it is a weighing machine in the short term, these fuckers would be right in the short run.

Amazingly enough, Bokolis does not want this.  I like my sex with my sex, and my sports with my sports.  Some hornbag will make youtube videos cherry-picking the best-looking asses of female volleyball players in those shorts and get a bunch of people to look.  Still, I'd rather see the pros of the skin trade, swimsuit models and porn whores, in those outfits than athletes.  Seeing pics of Hope Solo's nasty looking growler- even though that was not meant for our consumption- was bad enough.  Seeing Megan Rapinoe in the swimsuit issue was a soul-scarrer of a train-wreck.  I'd much rather watch them play football than shake their asses.

Aside- ever since Bokolis let a female friend convince me that Alex Morgan was not that hot, I've never been able to judge the looks of any of them.  In fact, when I saw Julie (Johnston) Ertz WAGged out at Super Bowl 52, my first thought was alarm that she may have given up football.  Of course, she has been playing professionally the whole while, but I'd never know.

Besides- and, Bokolis will blow that fantasy right out of the water for you- for the most part, jocks, female and male, are weird.  But, hey, they've got to earn, so go on with your patronage.  I'll try to reel this back in, while also trying to forget about Rapinoe in a thong.

So, they don't measure up physically, and they don't earn like the men. To boot, as opposed to doing their own thing, they have submitted their game to the patriarchal FIFA's rule. Nonetheless, the women are effectively asking that the cash cow that is the men's game (further) subsidize the women's game by bringing pay in line with the men- in effect, to bump up the women just for the sake of doing it.

hmmmm....ok, Bokolis will bang it around.

Training should be funded as closely to equal as is feasible all the way up and down the age levels, and elite-level women should not have to train and play on crappy turf fields, which would be unconscionable in the men's game.

As far as being paid, the reality is women's football is currently a second class sport, and there is a certain amount of grinning and bearing it that female footballers will have to suffer from choosing a calling that doesn't fund itself.  If schoolteachers have to suffer and no one cares, no one is going to give a fuck about the lot in life of a female footballer.  That said, Bokolis thinks there is little to be gained by being ruthlessly pragmatic.  Continuing to treat them like second-class citizens could quite possibly damage revenue on the men's side by turning women off to the men's game.

The American women, in particular, attempt to invoke Title IX, intended for federally funded and/or educational institutions, and assert that it should apply in this case.  Bokolis scratches his head, as, not only does Title IX involve entities that are not intended to be profitable (which FIFA most certainly is not), Title IX is the main roadblock to ANY college athletes getting paid.

While the education aspect is certainly not applicable, Bokolis isn't sure that the "Federal financial assistance" aspect of Title IX is applicable here.  Even if it is, it probably wouldn't be much of a problem for USSF to forego any federal funding, thus being able to tell the women to go fuck themselves.  Even if they get some of what they want from their federation, while the USWNT would be improving its own situation, it would seem a bellwether, but none of this would necessarily apply to other nations.

FIFA takes a big chance by alienating the US Women.  FIFA has gained much from the US market, even as it has barely tapped the well.  It is not the wisest thing to do anything that could jeopardize that income stream.  Is FIFA going to come through for all federations?  The answer is, not until it figures out how to make itself look like a superhero for doing so.

As it is, Ada Hegerberg, a Norwegian considered the best female footballer, has declined to play in this World Cup.  Her reasons are not entirely clear, but it is evident that she is sick and tired of the way FIFA and the national federations treat the women's game.  Even if she is the best player, she is just one woman, and the competition will shrug it off.

If the USWNT, whether as champions or not, were to boycott the next World Cup (to take place, presumably, in Australia), it would make a dent.  If the US boycotts AND whoever wins this year (France?) boycotts the next WWC, then it would be a sham.  If you lose the American woman as a consumer, the women's game is in trouble, and it's going to do no favors to the men.

Y'all muthafuckas didn't think I was going to do predictions, did you?

YNWA Six

This may be seen as crowing for winning the European Cup.  Bokolis has previously diminished the significance of winning the made-for-TV leagues.  Still, we won it and they didn't.  All things equal, though, Bokolis would've preferred the League.  Let's see where it goes.

At some point during Liverpool's second match of the EPL season, Bokolis had seen enough to declare that this was the best Liverpool side I had ever seen.  I had cooked up a scenario where they would amass 92 points and would be in with a shout for the League, but likely falling short.

The reassessment after round 22 yielded a projected total of 96 points.  Mind you, this was after Manchester City were on the right side of the luck of two posts and a GDS- 11 millimeters- to take a 2-1 decision against Liverpool.

As City could claim a maximum of 101 at that point, six dropped points in this scenario would be enough.  As City was having trouble with away fixtures, while Liverpool had taken all 45 available points against non-top 6 sides, Bokolis doubted that City could take maximum points at the middling quartet of Bournemouth, Brighton, Burnley and Palace.

Before City ever got to any of those places, they lost at Newcastle, three of the six points Bokolis was looking for.  I had taken my hand out of my pocket to reach for the trophy.  City ran the table from there, 14 wins from 14 matches.  Even though Liverpool bettered my outlook by one point, they were not afforded the necessary room for error.  The staggered matchdays gave the effect of head-bobs down the stretch of a horse race.

City got the ball 25.9 millimeters over the line at Burnley and, against Leicester, Vincent Kompany, after both he and David Silva committed fouls that could've resulted in red cards- Silva more so than Kompany- rifled in a 30-yarder, one of those shots that defenders dream about, one they usually put into the stands.

Just as he punted league position last season for the sake of the Champions League- Liverpool could've finished second but, aside from a few quid and bragging rights among the simple, second doesn't get you anything more than fourth- Klopp concentrated on the league while trying to get away with doing the minimum in the Champions League group stage.  The gambit got them to last season's final, where they fell victim to the dirty rat cunt motherfucker Sergio Ramos bulldogging Mohammed Salah's shoulder into the turf with no VAR, no recourse, and, oh yeah, two howlers from their keeper.  

To start this season, Klopp did the opposite, favoring the league.  He was trying to incorporate Naby Keita and Fabinho into the squad, but each took a while to get accustomed to the tempo of the squad.  Keita definitely trying to do too much out there, his speed and skill helping and hurting at the same time.

He also often started Milner and Henderson together.  This was often counterproductive, as they do enough of the same things that each would have to find other things to do on the pitch, which necessarily weakens their effectiveness.  They were more effective on the pitch at the same time when one of them, typically, Milner, came on as a sub, when there would be a defined duty for the substitute.

Liverpool just about slid by in the group stage, sealed by a 1-0 win at home against Napoli, when a ball that should've gone anywhere else fell lovingly to the upgraded goalkeeper, Alisson.  The victory was part of an eight wins in eight December that had them top of the table.

One of the things Bokolis appreciates about Jurgen Klopp is that he consistently learns from mistakes and improves the process, and, by extension, the team.  This season's mistake was where, in three (almost) successive matches, Klopp employed what Bokolis would call his 0-0 lineup.  To digress, elaborate and, possibly, explain myself:

Klopp mostly fields a 4-3-3 formation.  In a 4-3-3, not only are you always supposed to be attacking, the idea is to get the ball to your attackers as quickly as possible, leaving the opposition defenders without midfield support.  A 4-3-3 is meant to create imbalance, and it presumes that the side creating the imbalance would be in better position to deal with it than the more passive opponent.

Of course, the side creating the imbalance is itself imbalanced.  If you try to play defensively in a 4-3-3, you take your attackers out of the game.  You will either disconnect them because the midfielders will be too busy supporting the defense, or you will retreat to what will function as a 4-5-1 with two players playing out of position.

A 4-2-3-1 would be a better option for a more defensive setup, and it is Klopp's preferred formation.  However, neither of Salah or Mané like to play up top, and neither of them can pass worth spit.  Firmino can pass, but he is better at passing to midfielders than forwards.  And, he is certainly not fast or strong enough to be left to deal with two centre-halves focused (primarily) on him.  This is a bigger issue because Liverpool do not have a trequartista, capable of determining and exploiting the weak points of the opposition.  Henderson would do his best, and Keita is capable, but Keita took most of the season to find the right tempo, and was injured soon after he found it.  Ox could do it, but was still on his way back after tearing up his knee.

In Bokolis' 4-2-3-1, the danger is always going to be that the wingers do too much backtracking and run themselves into the ground before they can impact the attack.  The idea is that they funnel the opposition towards the holding midfielders. who would then combine with the relevant defender to destroy the buildup and have the wingers as a handy outlet after possession is gained.

This would work better with, say, Milner and Shaqiri as the wingers.  But, this only happens with Salah and Mané subbed out, and Klopp is not about to do that.  Except for protecting a late lead, for a few minutes, this formation is not viable for Liverpool.

The 4-3-3 typically involves a narrower midfield, and leaves the dirty work on the wing to the fullbacks.  While there is always room to operate on the flanks, that's where they want it.  The true way to carve up a 4-3-3 is diagonally through the middle of the park.

Because of the lack of depth at fullback, Klopp would often have to use Milner as a fullback when one of his regulars was hurt, as he had probably seen enough in his first day as coach to avoid Alberto Moreno at all costs.

Milner is Bokolis' kind of player- the proverbial man's man and pro's pro.  I have liked Milner since he was on City, even while Yaya Toure got all the praise.  From back then, I used to say that, for 60% of the time, Milner is as good a midfielder as anyone in England.  Once he played more than that, the diminishing returns would kick in and Milner would reach the cracking point and become somewhat less effective.  If Liverpool have to burn Milner at fullback, not only are they missing him in midfield, but he's that much closer to cracking.  It should've been known to them, as we saw it late last season.

What's worse, the demands placed on the fullbacks in a 4-3-3 make it a far more demanding position for Milner.  Thanks to the all-around mastery of Virgil van Dijk, Robinson and Alexander-Arnold got into minimal trouble from constantly bombing forward.  While Milner is still in top shape, he is not as fast as either regular fullback, and had a bear of a time dealing with fast wingers when filling in for them.  It was his experience- he knows when to hit, when to foul, when to take a yellow card, and when to win the ball- that allowed him to be effective.



Faced with these imperfect scenarios, Klopp would compromise and field a 4-3-3 with three defensively-minded midfielders, which Bokolis would tell my friends- before the game- was his 0-0 lineup.  This involved Henderson, Wijnaldum and Fabinho in midfield.  While not afraid to get forward, Fabinho is a decidedly defensively minded midfielder.  Once he found the pace of the team, he became a fixture, as he has a captain's level of understanding.  Wijnaldum, on Liverpool anyway, is a worker bee who is comfortable and can contribute in attack, but he does not himself create in attack.  Of the three, Henderson is easily the most capable of creating in attack and can score himself.  That said, his most visible contributions are more often when he is strong on the man with ball, turning over possession.

Klopp fielded these three in matches against Bayern Munich (2/19), at manchester united (2/24) and at Everton (3/3).  Granted, in the Bayern match, it was the first leg and Fabinho was at centre-half because Virgil van Dijk was out, so Klopp felt he had to favor his defense.  At manchester united, who were reaching the end of an extended new coach honeymoon, he had to put Milner at left back because Trent Alexander-Arnold was out, so he again fielded a midfield that favored his defense.

Both of those matches ended 0-0, with Liverpool looking punchless.  For the intervening match against Watford (2/27), Klopp came to his senses, and was rewarded accordingly.

Therefore, the most egregious mistake was fielding the 0-0 lineup of Fabinho, Wijnaldum and Henderson in midfield against Everton, despite having seen what it got him against Bayern and against united, despite having struggled for goals in the reverse fixture against Everton while still fumbling around with formation and rotation, despite fielding the strongest back line.

As with united and Bayern, Liverpool were listless against Everton.

It turned out that this would be the tipping point, as both Liverpool and City won all of their remaining matches.  Bokolis would like to tell you that this lineup was part of Klopp managing to City dropping points somewhere, like he did in the group stage.  But, it took Jordan Henderson complaining to Klopp about playing so far back to get the side back to an attacking setup.

We didn't get the League, but the Champions League was on.  The 3-0 loss in Barcelona was bitter because this isn't the Xavi, Iniesta, vamos a la fiesta vintage.  This is diving cunt Messi, (insert offense here) cunt Suarez, doesn't-fit-the-setup Coutinho, with Busquets and Pique wondering where all the cowboys have gone, kind of like the Yankees post-2001.

The striking thing about watching Barcelona at home is that they get to every loose/second ball.  When Bokolis was playing, I found this quality indicative of a side playing harder and/or smarter.  With Barcelona, it is also a function of being on the right side of refereeing decisions.  Their fans have no small part in this, as they have perfected the tactic of whingeing for calls.  They seem to anticipate when contact will occur (and their player will fall), so they are hollering before the referee has had a chance to process what he's seen.  The hollering then plays a larger role in the referee's decision-making.

While the fans are yelling, Messi and company roll around and wave invisible cards.  Barcelona commit the same (or worse) fouls, but don't get called for them at home.  Lest it seem that this is Bokolis' bitterness talking, it was even worse when Neymar was there, with both the diving/embellishing and the uncalled fouling.

It is easy, then, to draw the inference for why their play away from home in the Champions League has been god-awful these last two or three seasons; they don't get these calls.  In addition to not having the audacity to dive and/or embellish as much as they do at home, the opposing fans will also shout down their more legitimate claims.

Whether the analysis is sound or not, there was bitterness at the 3-0, but not despair.  Bokolis had these impressions of Barcelona before putting them here.  If Roma rolled them over last season, why couldn't Liverpool?  I can't say that I knew Liverpool would turn the tie around; I thought they'd likely get two goals at Anfield, that they might get a third in regulation, but I wasn't so sure that they'd also keep a clean sheet.  What we got was more than we could ask for.

If Liverpool had won the League, Bokolis wouldn't have cared about the Champions League.  Winning the League is chiefly about not having to hear the nonsense.  Without the League, the European Cup then became about Klopp no longer hearing the nonsense.  Because it was Spurs, there was no way we could lose, and no way we could live it down if we lost to the spuds.  Most of the people with whom I've become friendly through football are Arsenal supporters; I could not let them down.  As I told my friends, I only want the result, not the game.  Just give me the 3-1.

Accordingly, Bokolis watched the game with my buddy in a (half-empty) place where they know nothing about football.  While I might have yelled at home, I'm not much for screaming, and I didn't want to be in a place full of screaming Liverpool fans and I REALLY don't want to be around them if we lose.

Apparently, Klopp was also not concerned about the quality of the match, as he again fielded his 0-0 lineup.  Klopp was boxed in, as he didn't have Nabi Keita, had to save Milner for later, and he wouldn't dare trot out Ox or Shaqiri.  Ugh- he knows to let Henderson have a more advanced role, but I don't know...

This time Klopp and Liverpool lucked out by winning a penalty 26 seconds in.  Bolokis saw Mané check up after running down Henderson's pass over the top and thought, bah, you should've just shot first time this early.  The movement is over now, everyone knows you can't pass for sh...handball!?!  Penalty!

Spurs fans are insufferable, including one acquaintance who said he would go to his grave knowing that wasn't a penalty.  Remember how Bokolis said Mané was a terrible passer- he was apparently trying to float a ball into the space behind Sissoko, where Henderson was making a run and where he would've had a clear lane to one-time the soft pass from the top of the box.  Mané hit Sissoko in the chest with the pass, which deflected onto his raised arm.  It's a very unfortunate penalty, as even a perfect ball had little chance of leading to a goal-scoring opportunity, but you cannot have your hand up like you are hailing a cab, especially when you are stationary.  But, hey, delude yourself all you want.

Beyond saying that it wasn't the best-taken penalty, no one further analyzed it.  No one said a thing about Lloris basically shying away from the shot by pulling his hands away from where the ball was going.  Because Bokolis didn't want the bad energy, I also kept quiet about it.

The 0-0 lineup looks like a better idea when you basically start the match leading 1-0.  When a physically limited Harry Kane talks his way into the lineup, and a talent-limited Son Heung-min is favored over anyone, you'll generally be fine with one goal.  Son isn't horrible, but his form is so inconsistent that he is a wild card.  If you leave him alone for long enough, he might just get one past you.  Kane was nowhere, as much because his teammates couldn't get him the ball as because of his apparent lack of match fitness.  For all his time on the ball, the best Son could muster on this day was a knuckling 25-yard drive that forced a parry out of Alisson.

Spurs fans further deluded themselves in thinking that they were in the ascendency because the dominated possession.  They were allowed to hold the ball because they couldn't do much with it.  They did eventually threaten, but any anxiety was because Liverpool didn't look terribly interested in getting a second.

They got the Derek Jeter fist pump upon Salah's take, and a standing double fist-shake on Origi's late clincher.  No yelling.

Alisson- worth every penny.  van Dijk- worth every penny

YNWA

Rugby for fairies...bowl 5 3

Bokolis split the conference championships, taking the playoff record to 4-6.  Given that I've had no feel for about half of these games and had a few others come out screwy.  I would like to find a couple of side bets to attach to the pick so that a winning postseason is on the table.  But, without scouring the list of nonsense, all I've got is some hedges.

Take the Rams-Saints as an example.  After being sunk by some curious play that made for a miss-able field goal in the divisional round, which put Bokolis on the wrong side of the number, more curiously conservative playcalling by the Saints kept them from stepping on the necks of the Rams when they had them down.

This put them in a position where a horrible call could help bite them in the ass- and where Greg the Leg would kick them in the ass.  Funny how, while there was no call for a blow to the head on Brees on his final interception, Brady got that call when he wasn't hit in the head.

But, make no mistake, this was facilitated in no small part by the Saints neutering themselves.  Despite the utter inability to run-block, they continuously called running plays that got their running backs swamped.  This slowed them down enough for the Rams to hang in long enough to get lucky.

Aside - Bokolis thought those balls used on kicking plays were supposed to be tinkered with so that they don't go as far.  That kick by Zuerlein was good from at least 70.  I saw Graham Gano kick a 63-yarder to beat the Giants.  That muthafucka never came close to kicking a 63-yarder in his life.  Something is going on.

Brady actually threw the Chiefs a lifeline by being intercepted in the end zone.  When the Chiefs got it together in the second half, they shredded the Pats defense.  Ultimately, the Patriots, as ever, knew the way home.

It's also funny that, even while it seemed that, for once, the Patriots were on the short end of the curious calls, they got the two biggest calls of the game.  The offsides penalty that extended the final drive of regulation typically doesn't happen because the officials will usually tell a defensive lineman that he is lined up offside.  The officials apparently clammed up before that play.

Before that, of course, was the muffed punt by Edelman that was reversed out.  Bokolis doesn't think Edelman touched the ball.  But, only the Patriots and the Giants get that call reversed.

In any event, Bokolis gets to keep peddling my story about the Chiefs and Jets.




Rams (+2.5) over Patriots - It's almost needless to say but, if you believe in the Rams, you are obliged to do everything possible to find +3.  If the line doesn't move that way, you'll have to buy it up.  There is no way you can be on 2.5.  This is another battle of a seemingly better side against a team that knows the way home.

The Patriots have been able to run the ball.  This has kept the pressure off Brady, and no one has gotten to him this postseason.  As a result, Brady has made his perfectly useless receivers look like all-stars.

Allegedly, the Rams have the line to both stuff the run and get to Brady to at least knock him on his ass without getting a penalty for hitting him too hard.  They also have Gurley.

As for the hedges, Bokolis will also split another play- which, collectively, should come to half of the play on the game- on the Patriots in the first half (-0.5) and the over for the game (56).  The reasoning here is that, if the Patriots do take this game, they would have already taken the first half, and they will score enough points to make the over much more likely.  While all three of these can win independently of each other (i.e., Pats lead at the half, Rams win the game 31-28), that is not the point.

Rugby for fairies...Conference championships and the home -3

Bokolis wound up on the wrong side of a pair of results on last week's games.  It worked out to a  1-3 week, 3-5 for the playoffs.  While it would ordinarily be embarrassing, it reflects that I probably wouldn't have gone near any of the Saturday games, and probably would've backed away from the Saints after having sent it in on the Patriots.

Bokolis waffled back and forth on the Colts-Chiefs, so I can throw away the result.  The Colts went outside after being inside.  If there was a chance that they'd challenge the Chiefs' mettle, it ended with Vinatieri hitting the upright.

Cowboys-Rams came down to a couple of fourth down plays.  The Rams converted, the Cowboys didn't.  Aikman says the Rams got away with a blatant hold...womp womp.  Why didn't Dallas hold?

After seeing what the elements did to the Colts, Bokolis would've sent it in heavy on the Patriots.  I don't care what the Chargers did on east coast trips this year, whether going east or west, no way can you make trips on consecutive weeks and expect to fire.

The Saints fell out of bed, but managed to grind out a victory after spotting the Eagles 14 points.  They did it playing conservatively, then repeatedly throwing for first downs on 3rd and long.  When it was time to cover, Payton went into Herm Edwards mode, calling odd plays and depending on a long field goal to ice the game.  The field goal to cover the spread pushed to the right, and the Saints were ultimately bailed out by...oh dear

The good news is that Bokolis drank more liquor in a 30-hour period Friday into Saturday than I've had in about the last three years combined.  I didn't kill anybody, either- yay for me!

SAINTS (-3) over Rams - Last week's performance might make someone think that the Saints are vulnerable.  Bokolis saw a team playing close to the vest because they were down 14 early and, even though they were down 14, they decided they wouldn't have to score that much to win.  Also lost in the fuss was that, after that flurry, the Saints shut out the Eagles for the rest of the game.

On the flip, the chatter is about the Rams having two backs run for over a 100 yards against an allegedly good Cowboys defense.  I think that was more about a bad game plan and that it will be overvalued for this game.  Belief in the Saints probably necessitates buying a half-point.

Patriots (+3) over Chiefs - Bokolis has been telling Jets fans for over 20 years that because they won a rigged super bowl, they will not get to another one until all other teams get to one.  While they look at me like I am crazy, I then pause for effect and say, them and the Chiefs.  Then, it sinks in.  I am fully prepared to change the narrative when faced with the cognitive dissonance of the Chiefs winning, but I am married to my banter.  So, I have to forestall the changing of the guard and rely on some stat that says QBs in the playoffs for the first year are 0-9 vs Brady in the playoffs.  Actually, that sounds like a really stupid stat, doesn't it?  I'm just going to believe the Patriots know the way home, and that Andy Reid simply got rerouted last week on his way to the crapper.

Rugby for fairies...divisional round 2018 postseason

Bokolis is glad to be done with the wild card round.  Allegedly, we've dumped all the crap teams- and the Seahawks- and are ready for the proper playoff teams to play.  After a ho-hum 2-2, I welcome the divisional round and am keen to atone for last year's whiff.

Okay, keen may be too strong of a word.  Bokolis has to show the flag on Saturday, so the best I will do is peek in on those games.

There is declining momentum on the Chiefs.  Even with home field, Bokolis can't imagine the Chiefs getting it right twice.  This, of course, points towards the Patriots, after a unremarkable regular season, getting it in gear and progressing to yet another Super Bowl.

Home field, however, figures to play a big part for the Saints.

The games line up in increasing order of conviction.  In the old days, when I just had to bet them all, Bokolis would keep doubling up until I hit.

Colts (+5) over CHIEFS - As stated, Bokolis doesn't know what to make of the Colts.  I'd have to trust them outside.  The other side is that Mahomes is going to have to show me {nudge} he can perform when it matters, and Andy Reid is going to have to avoid cocking-up another playoff game.  Even if the Chiefs prove better, Reid will find some way to keep the Colts hanging around.

Cowboys (+7) over RAMS - Considering that the place will be at least half Cowboys fans, seven is a lot to lay.  Bokolis thinks the Rams will be tight, and that the Cowboys will keep it close enough.

PATRIOTS (-4) over Chargers - All those away wins notwithstanding, Bokolis does not see how Rivers, after all those losses, will be able to finally win one against Brady.  I think the back-to-back trips across country will get them this time.

SAINTS (-8) over Eagles - Bokolis is going to blindly jump on the idea that no one can keep up with the Saints in the dome.  If the Eagles are going to drop the crown, it should be against a team better than they are.  Accordingly, the Saints are going to have to piss this away for the Eagles to keep up.

wild card post mortem...who knew QBs and kickers

Despite saddling myself with two not-ready-for-primetime QBs, with the aid of a quirky back-door cover, Bokolis managed a split of the wildcard weekend.

In retrospect, the smartest money was on the Colts.  It would've taken some balls to take the Chargers, and Bokolis could not grow them enough to take the bolts.  My balls were up on the table for the Eagles- this is what I knew.

Who could know that a couple of inexperienced QBs could stink up the joint in their first time in the lights?  The Texans and Ravens QBs were so awful that Bokolis will pull a Parcells and refuse to mention them by name.

Bokolis will focus on the Ravens, as I watched that disaster.  It was painfully obvious that the QB did not know where to throw the ball.  He would look at his first option, see it covered, and break it down in a panic.  It is quite likely that his first option was covered because the Ravens built a dumbed-down playbook to accommodate the QB, which the Chargers, in turn, were able to easily decipher the second time around.  If I noticed this by the second series, anyone who had watched this team for any length of time this year must have surely known this.  The paid professionals must've been licking their chops.  The late, futile attempt at Tebow Time notwithstanding, that Harbaugh-B left this guy in to start the second half was done either by a coach who knew he was done after the season and couldn't wait to get the hell out of there, or on orders by management to not pull the QB.  You have to figure Harbaugh-B is out of there.

As an aside, boy, did they butcher those calls around the Chargers TD.  After the Chargers were not awarded a TD on a play where the ball broke the plane of the goal line before contact- the ball was actually marked about 26 inches from the goal line- the Chargers were then awarded a touchdown when not only was the runner down short of the goal line (given that he had to gain 26 inches), he seemingly fumbled before he was down, and that ball was picked up and taken 100 yards the other way for a would-be touchdown.  The officials had blown the play dead, which nullified the return, and delivered a cop-out of a replay ruling that the runner was down by contact short of the goal line.  The Chargers scored on the next play, which was the justified outcome.  Nine wrongs make a right.

Bokolis didn't watch the Titans, but it sounds like their QB was missing open guys left and right.  This bothers me because I don't know how seriously to take the Colts.

The Seahawks loss of their kicker led to a new way to backdoor cover.  Janikowski apparently did his hamstring on a missed field goal, and the back-up is some Aussie rules guy who cannot place kick.  This lead to two instances where the Seahawks went for the two-point conversion in situations where they would typically kick the extra point.  They converted both, with the second providing the final points in a two-point loss.  While it seems freakish, Bokolis would point out that, if Janikowski doesn't get hurt, he probably makes the FG.  If you do some adding, extrapolating, assuming, projecting and figuring, you might determine that the Seahawks would've kicked the extra point on the first TD after the injury, and that after scoring their final touchdown, they would've been down two points just the same and be going for the tie.  Unlike the attempt you saw, that attempt might have been met with some resistance from the Cowboys.

So, Bokolis has been typing this during the second half of Eagles-Bears.  I am prepared to say that the Bears are playing just conservatively enough for the Eagles to cover, as it seems that the Bears have figured out the Eagles secondary, mainly this kid Maddox.  Once the Bears take the lead, the Eagles appear to be done, but the spread still hangs in the balance.  Foles just hasn't been right and that interception he threw in the endzone in the first half seems like it will be the points left off the board that sink the Eagles.  Then, it comes back to the Bears playing conservatively.  The Eagles come down and score, but that is secondary to bleeding the clock.  The number is made.  The Bears get into position for a winning field goal and...oh, dear.

Bokolis would advise the kicker to head home without showering.

Rugby for fairies...2018-19 Postseason: wild card round

While the knuckle-draggers decided that Sundays with the wifey was less palatable than suffering through a kneeling or raised fist and have trudged back to the television, Bokolis again backed away from the NFL.  I've had shit to do.  I'm not going to let having shit to do today fully interfere with my fascination for playoffs.  With the stock markets trying to decide whether to correct or go full crash mode, the world could use a positive ROI right about now.  Let's see what Bokolis can do.

TEXANS (-1.5) over Colts - Bokolis wrote "Titans" before fixing.  Same shit?  This is an apt curtain jerker, as these two teams interest me the least.  Nonetheless, Bokolis is keen on seeing the Texans make a run this postseason.  These are two apparently hot teams.  I'm still surprised that three teams from the AFC South managed winning records.  They must have butched up on the AFC East.

I suppose Luck is more proven than Watson, and that's where the money is leaning.  In trying to make plays, Watson has been sacked a bunch this year.  This greatly bothers the pundits, but Bokolis less so.  The real issue for the Texans will be stopping Luck from finding Hilton.  I still can't figure out how he manages that without much of a running game or other wideouts.  It must be that other defenses are too stupid to stop it.  I'm going to bank on Luck messing this up at some point.

Seahawks (+2.5) over COWBOYS - The Seahawks will decide if they want to win this game.  The Cowboys can only decide how they want to lose it.

RAVENS (-2.5) over Chargers - Everyone remembers the throttling Baltimore put on the Chargers a few weeks back.  As much as Bokolis hates to go with the crowd, between that, the early Sunday start and having little faith in Rivers in this spot, just like with the early Saturday game, I can't bring myself to play the QB experience card.

Eagles (+6.5) over BEARS - Even if Bokolis is supposed to believe this Bears unit is semi-legit, I'm going to bank on an attack of pride for Philadelphia and enough self-doubt on the part of the Bears keeping this game hanging in the balance.