Reese's Pieces

So now that Tom Coughlin has "resigned" as Giants' head coach, the sixty-four thousand question that begs to be answered is why didn't Jerry Reese "resign" as well. Because if it's fair game to hold Coughlin accountable for how the wheels came off this season, it's only reasonable to hold Reese accountable for providing the wheels in the first place.

Look, Coughlin did a poor job this year. That's fairly obvious, but he didn't exactly have the '72 Dolphins to work with. It is the G.M.'s job to give his coach the tools to win and Reese has done a lousy job. The offense, save for Eli Manning and Odell Beckham, Jr, is paper thin, and the once vaunted defense is the worst in the NFL. That wasn't Coughlin's fault. Indeed, the two-time Superbowl-winning coach had almost no support from his front office. Jerry Reese took the reigns from Ernie Accorsi who had carefully built two championship teams.

In addition to drafting Manning, the list of players Accorsi either drafted or signed includes Justin Tuck, Osi Umenyiora, Antonio Pierce, Chris Snee, Plaxico Burress, Ahmad Bradshaw and Brandon Jacobs. He also hired Coughlin. By comparison, Reese brought in Victor Cruz, Jason Pierre Paul and Beckham and little more. While all three were considerable additions, they weren't nearly enough to propel the team by themselves. As Accorsi's players either retired or departed for other teams, Reese's replacements couldn't cut it.

Whoever the Giants pick to coach the team in 2016, this much is certain: if Reese doesn't do a considerably better job at bringing in talent, the results will be the same. Another disappointing season and another year in which Eli Manning will not have a shot at winning a Superbowl. The Mara family has a long history of being patient, sometimes to a fault, with their employees. They certainly showed that patience with Coughlin. Virtually any other coach would've been fired a year or two ago. Just look at what happened to Chip Kelly after just one losing season in Philadelphia. But their reluctance to fire Reese might well come back to haunt them. While Reese may be only the third general manager since 1979, he is by far the least effective.

And now he is tasked with rebuilding a team he had a huge role in dismembering.

Ya Gotta Bereave

In a word, it was brutal. How brutal? This one statistic, more than any other, summed it up best.  Of the 53 innings in the 2015 World Series, the Royals led in only 13 of them. And keep in mind, five of those 13 innings came in game two.

Going into the fall classic, the Mets had one advantage over the Royals: their starting pitching. And with the exception of game two, the starters certainly did their job. So why was this series so lopsided? Why did a team which led for 40 out of 53 innings and had late-inning leads in four of the five games in the series come up short? Three reasons: a lack of clutch hitting, a porous bullpen and shoddy defense. In every measurable metric, sans the starting pitching, the Royals were by far the superior team.

Sadly, you could see this day coming. Since the trade deadline deals that Sandy Alderson pulled off, the Mets were a streaky team offensively, led by Yoenis Cespedes. There's no denying he carried the team from the dog days of August through mid September, when he began to cool off. Indeed, this team feasted off of some of the worst pitching in the National League. The Mets went from one of the worst scoring teams in the majors to one of the best virtually overnight.

But they lived primarily on the long ball, more so than any other contending team. Coupled with their starting pitching, they had a huge advantage over both the Dodgers and the Cubs. So much so, that their two biggest flaws - the bullpen and shaky defense - never played a factor. Terry Collins was able to ride his starters deep into games, even using his closer to get the final six outs in the deciding game against the Dodgers.

But the Royals were successfully able to expose the Mets' flaws. Their ability to put the ball in play severely tested a defense that was in over its head. And the bullpen was, for all intents and purposes, a total failure. From Jeurys Familia's blown saves in games one, four and five, to Tyler Clippard's inability to get crucial outs as a set-up man, it was painful to watch. Small wonder why Collins elected to allow Matt Harvey to start the 9th inning in game five. He was about as close to perfection as any pitcher had been for the Amazin's in the entire series.

And then there were the errors committed by David Wright, Daniel Murphy and Lucas Duda, all of them costly. Wright's poor throw in game one set up the eventual game-winning run; Murphy's inability to field a ground ball opened up the flood gates in game four; and Duda's wide throw to the plate in game five allowed the tying run to score. Marv Throneberry would've been proud.

But it was their lack of clutch hitting that really did the Mets in. The bottom of the 6th inning in game five was a textbook example of how not to win a series. The Mets loaded the bases with no outs and the most they were able to score was one run. One stinking run! Conversely, whenever the Royals got runners in scoring position, as they tended to do in the later innings, they usually plated them. They put on a clinic in every game except game three.

So now that it's over, where do the Mets go from here? Clearly, Alderson has some decisions to make. He's already put to bed one question: whether to bring back Collins. The organization signed him to a two-year extension. While I'm not a huge Collins' fan, I have to admit, there weren't a lot of options. He may not be the best, but he's far from the worst this team could do and, unlike the meltdown that occurred with the Washington Nationals, his players seem to love him. Go figure.

Next up will be deciding whether to tender offers to both Cespedes and Murphy. Both played integral parts in getting the Mets to both the postseason and the World Series. Murphy had himself one of the great runs in baseball, smacking a home run in six consecutive games. But both players did virtually nothing in the Series. Not only that, both made huge errors. Cespedes got doubled off first base when a liner by Duda was caught, ending game four and let's not forget the aforementioned flub by Murphy earlier in the game.

If I had to guess, I'd say the Mets let Cespedes walk without an offer. No way they're going to give him the $200 million he's looking for, and for once, I'm on their side in this. The problem with Cespedes is that he's vulnerable against top-notch pitching. He either drives the ball to Pluto or he grounds out. Murphy, however, is another story. For the right price, I'd bring him back. Yes he's a liability in the field, but his ability to play multiple positions, coupled by a low strikeout ratio, will make him a good fit.

That leaves the bullpen as Alderson's next and most essential project. Clippard has pitched his last game in a Mets' uniform. Good riddance. That means a replacement for him is essential. Addison Reed could fill his shoes. Or Alderson could look outside the system and acquire someone either through trade or free agency. He will also have to find a lefty. Every good team in baseball has one in the pen that can get valuable outs, except the Mets. And if Bartolo Colon can be enticed to accept a relief role, he could be that bridge that Collins has been looking for.

The loss of Cespedes means that we will find out what Juan Lagaris is made of. If Alderson isn't comfortable with him in center, a replacement will have to be found. That won't be easy. Good center fielders don't grow on trees. Michael Conforto should come into his own as the permanent left fielder. He has good power and can hit for average. And while Duda will never win a gold glove at first, he's still better than anybody else in the system.

Come July, the Mets will have arguably the best starting rotation in baseball with the return of Zach Wheeler from Tommy John surgery. If they can hold their own offensively, they will be contenders for the eastern division of the National League. They may have gotten shellacked by the Royals, but brighter days are ahead for this franchise.

Mets Will Win, If...

Going into their first World Series in 15 years, the New York Mets are slight favorites over the Kansas City Royals. The reason comes down to starting pitching. Put succinctly, the Mets have a huge advantage here. All four of their starters have extremely impressive ERAs, much more impressive than the Royals.

In fact, when you break it down, both teams are fairly close everywhere else. Both have impressive lineups that can inflict damage on the other team's pitching; though, as we shall see, each do it differently. And both clubs have solid closers in their bullpen. But it's their starters that give the Mets the edge and why many feel they should prevail in the Series.

Yet I remain cautiously optimistic. Why? Because until now the Mets' starters haven't been truly tested. The Dodgers' lineup was, well, a joke. At best, there were maybe two or three legitimate hitters on it. The Cubs' lineup was built around the home run. They mauled the Cardinals in the divisional series. Against the more potent arms of the Mets, they wilted.

The Royals won't go away so quietly. While they can hit the occasional home run, they much prefer to smack the ball around to all areas of the park. They took apart the Blue Jays' pitching in the previous series. They can test a pitching staff like few lineups can.

This presents a huge problem for the Mets, especially their likely game two starter, Jacob deGrom. On two occasions deGrom was on the ropes in this post season: game five against the Dodgers and game three against the Cubs. He fell behind early and ofen and put his team in trouble. His pitch count was extremely high through the first four innings of both games. What saved him was the inability of both the Dodgers and Cubs to capitalize on their opportunities.

If the same thing should happen to him against the Royals, it will cost him this time. DeGrom won't be the beneficiary of either a lousy hitting team or a sloppy and undisciplined one. Kansas City's lineup is patient enough to wait him out and make him throw a hittable strike. Also, since they don't strike out a lot, deGrom will have to entice the Royals' hitters to hit 'em where they are rather than where they ain't.

With that in mind, it becomes imperative that game one starter Matt Harvey win the opener. Harvey is for all intents and purposes the most complete starter the Mets have. If they are to win the Series, Harvey must win his games. Period.

Also, Terry Collins will have to get solid performances from his bullpen. And that means more than just Jeurys Familia. At some point Tylor Clippard and Addison Reed are going to be on the mound and both must come through. Expecting these young starters to go eight innings each game is way too much to ask.

So there you have it. The Mets will win if both Jacob deGrom and Matt Harvey win their games and if the bullpen holds up. If either falters, it will be another close but no cigar year for the Amazins.

Prediction: Mets in six.

Mets vs. Cubs Prediction

For the first time in nine years, the New York Mets will play for the right to get into the World Series. I needn't remind any of you that the last time didn't go particularly well. The image of Carlos Beltran with the bat on his shoulders taking a called third strike has been seared into our collective consciousness. When you couple that with the epic '07 collapse down the stretch, it has been a long and bitter nine years.

But if Mets' fans were chomping at the bits to get back to the World Series, just imagine what Cubs fans have been going through. The last time their team won a pennant was 1945; the last time it won a championship was 1908. At least Mets' fans can take solace that their team has been to four World Series, winning two of them, all since the end of World War II.

Before I begin my series breakdown, I think it only fair to tip my hat to both Mets' management and its owners. While it pains me to admit it, Fred and Jeff Wilpon deserve some credit for giving the green light to Sandy Alderson to make the moves necessary to bring a division title to New York. And Alderson made the most of the trade deadline, getting Yoenis Cespedes and several other key players.

Those trades, along with an underachieving Washington Nationals team - picked by many as a slam dunk for the division, possibly the league championship - allowed the Mets to take this division. Prior to the trades, the Mets were barely a .500 team.

Now on to the matchups. A look at both teams shows that they are virtually identical in runs scored, home runs and team ERA. What that means is that, barring a miscue, this series should go 6 or 7 games. The Mets' have an edge in position players everywhere, except 1st and 3rd base. And they have a deeper starting rotation than the Cubs. However, the Cubs have without a doubt the best starter in the series in Jake Arrieta. The Mets are going to have to beat him at least once in this series in order to advance.

If there is one Achilles heal for the Mets, it's their bullpen. Put succinctly, it's brutal. How brutal? In game 5 against the Dodgers, Terry Collins was forced to use starter Noah Syndergaard in the 7th inning and needed to have his closer Jeurys Familiar pitch the last two innings for the save. The Mets' starters are going to have to go at least seven or eight innings in their starts. Otherwise, this series could get ugly fast.

And even allowing for that, at some point Collins will have to ask his bullpen to get a few outs. Look for him to lean on 42 year old Bartolo Colon to provide some valuable relief. He doesn't have much of a choice. Tyler Clippard, obtained at the trade deadline as the set-up man for Familia, has been a bust of late.

It comes down to this. If the Mets' bullpen can get a few outs in this series, the Mets will prevail; if, not, the Cubs will advance to the World Series for the first time since 1945. The heart says Mets; the head says Cubs.

Prediction: Mets in 7.

Nightmare at Dallas

I was going to title this posting Return of the Fumble, but the above title will suffice. Besides, there was only one true culprit that November day at the Meadowlands and at least Bob Gibson, the offensive coordinator who called that ridiculous play, got his just deserts. Last Sunday's loss had a litany of villains.

Let's start with the head coach. It pains me to say this, but Tom Coughlin needs to go. He simply isn't up to handling a team the way a head coach needs to. There is simply no excuse for him not making sure his assistant coach and quarterback were on the same page. With just under 2 minutes left in the game, up by three and the ball at the 2 yard line, with no timeouts left for Dallas, how in the world do you allow a pass play to be called by your offensive coordinator? The correct call is a run up the middle. If you get in, the game is over; if you don't, you run another 40 seconds off the clock and you kick a field goal. The Cowboys would have about 58 seconds left in which to march the length of the field instead of a minute 38 seconds. Tom blew it big time.

But even allowing for the Coughlin meltdown, Eli Manning should've known that the Cowboys had no timeouts left - and if he didn't, shame on him. If he didn't have a man open in the end zone, the correct play was to fall down on the ball and take the sack. Again, the Giants would've kicked a field goal and Dallas would've gotten the ball back with under a minute to play. Manning should know better. No excuse.

But now we come down to the defensive coordinator: Steve Spagnuolo. For most of the game, his players made life hell for the Cowboys. They relentlessly pursued Dallas and forced three turnovers, two of which lead to scores for the Giants. But on the last two Cowboy possessions, they were nowhere to be found. Saying they were soft would do a disservice to the word soft. Dallas marched down the field twice virtually uncontested. The winning drive took all of 90 seconds. Tony Romo could've had a ham sandwich and a cup of coffee in the pocket, that's how pathetic the Giants' defense looked. This was the epitome of a prevent defense.

All three of these geniuses have a lot of explaining to do. They didn't just snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, like that infamous 1978 Giants team did that November Sunday; they let a team that had outplayed them but made several bad plays steal a game they had no right to win.

That's right, this was a game the Giants by all accounts should not have won, but were less than 2 minutes away from taking. The Cowboys had the ball most of the game and controlled the line of scrimmage. Had they not turned the ball over three times, the Giants would never have been in a position to win at all.

And that's what makes this loss so brutal. For most of the game, the Giants teased their fans and had them thinking, maybe we're not so bad after all. And then the roof fell in and reality came back to bite them in the ass. They've had moments like this in the Coughlin era - way too many for my taste. But this one stung more than all the others combined.

The Giants will try to spin this by saying, "it's one game, we'll learn from this and not let it happen again." Sure they will. And I've got a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you for a wooden nickel.

The football Giants have been making way too many excuses for way too long. It has been four years since the team last had a winning record and that just happened to be the year they last won the Super Bowl.

The sad truth is that if the Giants ever expect Eli Manning to deliver another title they are going to have to get him a coaching staff and yes a G.M. (you didn't think I had forgotten about you, Jerry Reese?). Both the offensive and defensive lines are a mess and both the secondary and linebackers are thin. John Beason's absence proved fatal on that last Cowboy drive.

It is the job of the general manager to get the best players for his coaching staff, and it is the coaching staff's job to make sure they get the best out of those players come game time. Both have been utter failures these last few years and it's high time that Steve Tisch and John Mara realized this and pulled the plug on this current group.

Enough with the lame excuses. Enough with coming up short and allowing games to get away. They say the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over. For the Giants, that has become a mantra.

Rangers Pony Up To Keep Stepan

In the end, the Rangers didn't have any other choice. They couldn't afford to let their number one center go to arbitration only to save, what, a couple hundred thousand dollars. So they bit down hard, went all in and signed Derek Stepan to a six-year deal worth $39 million. That's $6.5 million per year. The deal also comes with a no-movement clause, which means, barring Stepan taking an oozie into the Garden and airing the joint out, he's not going anywhere.

Of course the key question begging to be answered is this: Is Stepan worth the money? The answer is yes and no. Yes, because, with the exception of Derick Brassard, there was no one else on the roster capable of putting up the numbers Stepan did last year and pretty much has for his entire tenure with the Blueshirts. Face it, with Marty St. Louis retiring after last year's aborted playoff run, goals are going to be a premium this coming season. Kevin Hayes, Jesper Fast and J.T. Miller may turn out to be excellent scorers, or they could be busts, or something in between. No one knows for sure. Losing Stepan or, worse, having an unhappy Stepan would have been disastrous, especially given that the window for this team is at best two years.

No, because he isn't really a number one center not in the strictest sense of what a number one center means. He's not as valuable as Jonathan Toews, who just signed his own multi-year contract with the Blackhawks for the same amount of money. Seriously, who would you rather have as your number one, Stepan or Toews? The fact is when you compare Derek Stepan to other contending teams' top centers, he comes up short. Good, yes; great, no.

Over his relatively brief career with the Rangers, Stepan has been a reliable scorer. But his two biggest handicaps are his lack of size and his inability to win face-offs; the latter proving far more costly, especially for a team that thrives on puck possession the way the Rangers do. It was nothing short of embarrassing that the number one face-off man was the number four center, Dominic Moore.

Indeed that is one glaring weakness which new General Manager Jeff Gorton failed to address. Sadly, the Rangers will enter this coming campaign a weaker team than they were when they were unceremoniously booted from last year's playoffs. Why? Because Gorton only has $500 thousand of cap space left to his disposal. And, mind you, that was after he was forced to dump Carl Hagelin's contract in exchange for Emerson Etem's.

Realistically, the Rangers are going to have a hard time coming close to matching what they did last year. They are no-where near as deep as they were two years ago when they went to the finals and it is hard to see them winning the division with this squad, much less the Presidents' Trophy or Stanley Cup championship. They still have an imposing defense corps, but they could use some help up front. If Gorton could dangle one of his prized defensemen - say, Dan Girardi or Kevin Klein - for a proven goal scorer with some grit, that could mean the difference between an early playoff exit or a deep playoff run.

21 And Counting

In the end, the team that was built with one goal in mind - to win the Stanley Cup - not only failed in its mission, it didn't even manage to get back to the finals. The Presidents' Trophy Rangers were blanked on their home ice for the second game in a row. The team that hadn't lost a game 7 in its building since, well, forever, was thoroughly drubbed by a Tampa Bay Lightning team that only three days earlier had been lit up for seven goals. Like that great T.S. Eliot poem, they didn't go out with a bang but with a whimper.

Consider this: the Rangers scored more goals in the 3rd period of game 6 in Tampa (five) than they scored in all four games at the Garden combined (four). They were so inept in their building they made the Lightning players look like Bob Gainey clones. For those of you too young to remember, Bob Gainey was arguably the greatest defensive forward to ever play the game. He was to hockey what Bill Russell was to basketball.

So how did this Jekyll / Hyde of a series turn out to be the nightmare of all nightmares for the Rangers? Well, first off, it wasn't just this series. The Blueshirts had been flirting with disaster ever since the playoffs began. Let's not forget that they were 1:41 away from going down in five to the Capitals. Face it, if Braden Holtby doesn't whiff on Chris Kreider's shot, they never make it into overtime and instead of talking about their disappointing exit in the conference finals, we're talking about the great upset in the second round. And even the five games it took them to dispatch the Penguins - easily the weakest team in the playoffs - were all close games. The last two wins, both in overtime, could easily have gone the other way.

Funny, for a team that racked up a franchise-record 53 wins, they never once dominated in any of their postseason contests. Even in the three games where they managed to get their offense going - game 6 against the Caps and games 4 and 6 against the Lightning - they were badly outplayed for huge stretches by their opponent. In each game, their world-class goaltender, Henrik Lundqvist, either held onto to a lead his team seemed determined to hand back or gave his team the chance it needed to regain its footing and surge ahead. To say he was the team's best player would be an understatement.

Even last night, Lundqvist did his best to give his team a chance to win. He stood on his head for two periods, making save after save. He robbed Tyler Johnson point blank just outside his crease. The save was eerily similar to the one he made on Steven Stamkos in game 6. However in that game, seconds after the King made his heroic stop, his team responded by scoring a goal. Last night, there was no heroics by the men in blue. This time, there was no last-minute goal to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat. Even their world-class goalie looked mortal in that all-decisive 3rd period.

So now that this season is over, what do the Rangers do next? To be sure, Glen Sather has some decisions to make. While the core of this team is certainly good, it was obvious from the opening drop of the puck, it had some glaring weaknesses. I addressed some of them when the playoff began. To be sure, those roosters came home to crow in the conference finals.

For starters, I'm fairly certain Marty St. Louis has played his last game as a Ranger, perhaps even the NHL. He looked every second of his 39 years in this tournament. Expect Sather to utilize his $5 million salary elsewhere. The Rangers have some cap issues, thanks to the trade for Keith Yandle, and even with the league expected to increase its salary cap by $4 million, Sather will have to use all his skills to tweak this team so it can go the distance in the postseason.

Here's what I would do if I were the G.M. I would definitely sign Derek Stepan, but I would not offer Carl Hagelin a contract. If he files for arbitration and he wins, I would trade him. He did absolutely nothing after the Pittsburgh series. If anything, the style with which he plays is the reason the Rangers are playing golf right now instead of getting ready to play for the Cup. Instead of a flashy skater, I'd try to pry away a punishing winger who can park his ass in front of the opposing goalie's net and score a few goals. The Ranges don't have a single forward outside of Kreider who is capable of doing this. In fact, so inept were they, Alain Vigneault was forced to use defenseman Dan Boyle up front on the power play several times in this series.

Then I'd address the face-off issue that plagued this team throughout most of the season. It was nothing short of an embarrassment that their number one face-off man happened to be their number four center. Every other team in the final four all had centers with impressive face off stats. I would make every effort to get a center who can win a face off AND score. I like Dominick Moore, but if he is your go-to guy to win a face-off in a crucial spot in a game, you're screwed.  Either way, you're not going very far in the playoffs. Period!

Think about it. A first line consisting of Derrick Brassard, centering Rick Nash on the left and a healthy Mats Zucharello on the right, followed by a line of, say, Antoine Vermette centering Derek Stepan on the right and Chris Kreider on the left. The Blackhawks have even more cap issues than the Rangers, so it is unlikely they will be able to resign Vermette in the off season. If Sather is creative, he can have a formidable 1-2 punch upfront. Stephan moving to wing makes perfect sense. The way he positions himself in the offensive zone, he looks more like a winger than a center anyway. If Sather can't address the center issue via free agency, maybe Kevin Hayes could be part of a package to land one.

That would leave J.T. Miller centering Jesper Faust and James Shepard on the third line, with Dominic Moore centering a yet to be determined fourth line. A little too lean for your tastes? Consider that the Lightning got all but two of their goals in this series from their top two lines. Depth only means something if your top gunners come through. In this series, the Lightning's top gunners ran rings around the Rangers top gunners. It wasn't even close. Take away the five point night Brassard had in game 6 and it was a joke.

And then there's the coach. Alain Vigneault was the polar opposite of his predecessor. He treated his players like men with respect and dignity, unlike John Tortorella, who acted like a dickhead most of the time and drove his players like a drill sergeant. When he was fired, you could hear the entire Rangers' locker room exhale.

But Vigneault has two glaring weaknesses that unfortunately came back to bite this team. The first is he is stubborn to a fault. Not once in this year's playoff, or last year's for that matter, did he make any adjustments to his system.  It was clear that every team that played them knew what to expect. The Capitals pounded and pounded the Rangers and kept them primarily to the perimeter of the ice, limiting their scoring chances. The Lightning applied the same strategy, but unlike the Caps, had the talent to make it work. The result was that the Rangers, after winning the first game 2-1, never won another close game in the series. Credit their coach, John Cooper, for having the smarts to switch gears and convince his team to change their style from offense first to defense first. He definitely outcoached Vigneault in this series.

The second weakness is almost as bad. For all his professional demeanor, Vigneault is simply too loyal to his players. They rarely, if ever, were benched for their failures. Yes, they might miss a shift or two for a blown assignment, but they could always count on their coach having their back.  When it was painfully apparent that St. Louis had nothing in the gas tank, Vigneault still put him out on the power play. Compare and contrast him to Joel Quenneville, the Chicago Blackhawks coach, who pulled his goaltender when he gave up questionable goals in the Nashville series and even benched the player his GM traded a number one draft pick to obtain. In Quenneville's world, it's pretty simple: play well and get ice time, struggle and you ride the bench.

Sather must get his coach to be more amenable and less tolerant. If it was fair to criticize Tortorella for his shortcomings, then it's only fitting to hold Vigneault accountable for his. Systems and loyalty are all fine and dandy, but when that system isn't working or your players aren't measuring up, changes must be made. Throughout this whole season there were two constants: the Rangers were as predictable as dirt and, for the most part, they had carte blanche. If this isn't corrected, expect another disappointing postseason next year.

The good news is that, with a little tweaking, the Rangers have the horses to compete for the Stanley Cup next year; the bad news is that their window of opportunity is rapidly closing. Lundqvist is 33. Billy Smith, the great Islander goaltender, won the last of his four Cups when he was 33. The sands of time are running out on the King. He has maybe two or three years left in his prime. If the Rangers don't win the Cup by then, this team, which as played more playoff games than any other team over the last four years, will have to start over and rebuild.

And for the millions of Rangers' fans who have waited patiently since 1994 for another championship, it won't just be 21 years and counting; it might well be a decade or more.

Ironic, isn't it? When Sam Rosen said that '94 championship would last a lifetime, who knew he was being prophetic?