NFL playoffs, wise guys, and Serena

Something strange is going on regarding the NFL playoffs. The two conference championship games feature San Fran @ Seattle, and New England @ Denver.

In the NFC, the S&S squads out west split their two regular season games. At Seattle, the Seahawks thrashed the Niners 29-3. In the return match in SF, the 49ers barely escaped with a victory on a last second field goal. Given the combination of those two games -- one would think Seattle is the superior team.

Seattle is also well-known as having the loudest home fans in the entire NFL. They'll be absolutely bonkers for this game, jacking up their heroes. Further, the odds-makers have installed the Seahawks as a 3.5 point favorite -- though yours truly is surprised that point spread isn't a bit larger.

So why are most of the talking head experts picking San Fran to win this game? And it's not like these guys are yahoo wannabe sports reporters spouting off. Many of them are former players and coaches that have been there, done that, continue to study the game, and surely know more about it than the bookies in the back rooms of Vegas. Or do they?

Who will win indeed? We'll see. (I'm picking Seattle)

In the AFC, it's another showdown between Tom Brady and Peyton Manning. The Patriots came back from a huge deficit to defeat the Broncos at New England earlier in the year. But this game is in Denver. Those same odds-makers have the Broncos as a 5.5 point favorite. (Actually, it's impossible in either game to win by 3.5 or 5.5, but somehow those tricky wise guys use those half points to their advantage to sway potential bettors one way or the other.)

This might well be Peyton's last go-round at winning a second Super Bowl. He's enjoyed a record-setting season with passing yardage and TDs, has a great team around him and, at age 37, chances are Manning's not going to get many more chances to grab the ring.

Then again, Tom Brady has pretty well owned Manning in the past, sporting a 10-4 record in head-to-head match-ups. A lot of those same talking heads seem to think the Brady bunch will find a way yet again to thwart Manning.

So who will win? We'll see. (I'm picking Denver)

At the Australian Open, #1 seed Serena Williams just got knocked off by #14 seed Anna Ivanovic. Quite the upset.

To her credit, in a post-match interview, Serena didn't come out with her usual assortment of whines after she lost. No tummy ache, headache, back spasms, or sore toes. No allergies acting up, sunspots plotting against her, and nary a conspiracy in sight. Amazing. Maybe she's finally starting to mature and show a little good sportsmanship. Sometimes the opponent just plays better. It happens. She even gave Ivanovic a little bit, not much, but some credit for playing well. It's a start.

Thing is, Williams is 32 years old. Not exactly a geezer, but certainly in her "golden years" as a pro tennis player. The competition being what it is these days, a lot of players, both male and female, get kicked to the curb by the kids before they ever see 30.

Could Serena be on borrowed time, and might this be the beginning of the inevitable fall?

Maybe, maybe not. But if she doesn't retire, it's coming, and likely in the near future. One need only look at her sister. Venus is only a single year older than Serena, and was once a dominant tennis player herself, winning everything in sight. Then WHAM. Father Time conked her over the head. The last couple years Venus hasn't even been considered a serious contender in the world of lady's tennis -- at least in single's play. The kids have passed her by and left her in their dust.

Both the past and present legends came as kids themselves, rose to greatness knocking off the old guard, and won a slew of championships. But the wall awaited them all. And in the world of pro tennis it comes at a lot younger age than in most other sports. It's just the nature of the game.

But it's nice to see before she hit it -- Serena finally showed she could be a good sport -- sort of.