The first round of the NFL playoffs is usually my favorite sports weekend. It’s the time we find out which teams are just happy to be there – and which are real Super Bowl contenders ready to move on to the two top conference seeds. However, this year’s match-ups find me scratching my head regarding the NFL playoff structure.

First, I question how a team tied for the third best record in the NFL, and a better record than four teams in the playoffs, doesn’t make the 12-team cut.  The 11-5 Patriots are sitting home while we’re forced to watch the likes of San Diego (8-8), Arizona (9-7), Philadelphia (9-6-1), and Minnesota (10-6).  Secondly, how do the Chargers at 8-8 get home field advantage over the 12-4 Colts, or the 9-7 Cardinals get to host the 11-5 Falcons?

The NFL’s four divisions per conference is the first problem. It rewards teams in weak divisions and hinders the quality of depth in stronger divisions. By doing so, it lessens the importance of the regular season. This year is a prime example with two pathetic teams from the NFC and AFC west divisions in the tournament.

However, even if you’re happy with the qualification structure, teams in the playoffs should be seeded by record. Allowing San Diego to host Indy is crazy. The Colts are tied for the second best record in the league. That should be worth something.

This weekend I look for all the visiting teams to move on to the next round, with Minnesota the only home team with a shot at a W. However, it probably won’t matter, as the two top seeds in each conference should end up playing for a Super Bowl berth.

Not since the mid 1930s when Charles B. Darrow presented his newly invented board game to Parker Brothers has money been thrown around so frivolously. I haven’t played Monopoly in years, but it continues to be the best selling board game in the world, with MLB apparently its leading advocate.

The Yankees recently committed nearly a half-billion dollars to three players. Even Mr. Monopoly couldn’t compete at that level. Hell, there’s only a total of $15,140 in a standard game of Monopoly. Surely a sizable piece of change in 1935, but just gas money for today’s professional athlete.

The recent New York signing of C.C. Sabathia, A.J. Burnett, and Mark Teixeira has Yankees haters complaining – and baseball purists looking to castrate the all-powerful, super-agent Scott Boras. However, even though I’m no fan of Boras and his tactics, and I grew up hating the Yankees, they play within the rules of the game. The Yankees could simply “pocket” their profits but, for better or worse, they invest in the free agent market. It certainly doesn’t guarantee championships. In 2008, the top three payrolls in MLB (Yankees, Tigers, and Mets) didn’t even make the playoffs. The champion Phillies ranked 13th and AL Champs Rays 29th, respectively.

However, as MLB payrolls continue to spiral, are you not concerned about the game’s future? I curiously await 2009 attendance figures outside of New York, Boston, Chicago and LA.

Have we all been blinded by capitalism so much that we forget MLB is a league and, collectively, it is only as strong as its weakest link. This notion of teams “driving up prices” of their competitors (e.g. Red Sox-Yankees) is foolish. Eventually, that philosophy comes around to bite them all. If the Red Sox were simply driving up the Teixeira price, won’t that affect the future cost to them for the services of Kevin Youkilis?

MLB and the MLBPA need to take a long, hard look at the future of the game and stop trying to simply line their pockets with cash while the going is good. We have seen what that can do to the economy. MLB is not immune. It’s time for a salary cap.

Maybe our government should be going to MLB for loans rather than the Peoples Republic of China. I would feel more comfortable with a $1-trillion debt to them than China (which, frightfully, it will soon be). Giving my tax dollars to Mark Teixeira as apposed to a communist nation might not be an economically sound investment, but it would certainly be more entertaining.

Sarcasm aside, are MLB owners paying attention? They appear to be throwing money around with their heads in the sand. Are they not aware of the economy and the big-3 U.S. automaker problems? Don’t MLB executives see how the automakers’ Boards of Directors let their executives and the United Auto Workers dictate their demise? The game is the same, just flip the names. Replace Board of Directors with MLB. Change GM, Ford, and Chrysler to Yankees, Red Sox, and Mets. And call the UAW the MLBPA (players association). For years, auto executives couldn’t see the forest for the trees and spent their way to failure. They wouldn’t stand up to the union, thus payroll got out of control. Sound familiar?

We can talk about foolish baseball owners and the oft-used quote, “If they couldn’t afford it, they wouldn’t pay it.” That carries some truth. But when compensation to players are open books, which is precisely what unions want, contracts get out of control. If you’re not a union person, do you know exactly what the workers next to you are being paid?

Unions had their place in time, but times have changed. I’m all for buying American, however, many American products have become inferior due to the need to cut cost-of-goods to supplement payroll and hit competitive price points. However, Americans want both affordable prices and quality. Hence, they can’t buy American. They buy Toyota and Honda.

I recently read a column by a New York sports writer regarding the Yankees spending $161 million on C. C. Sabathia. He stated, “It’s a natural progression of the market.” What market is he looking at?  The only “market” I see grossly over-spending during these difficult times is MLB (and other professional sports leagues).

MLB has been riding a wave of success for a number of years. The league is more popular than ever. However, not so long ago, the real estate market was booming too.

I hope MLB and the owners have long-term fiscal planning in place, because I don’t think corporate America will be filling their wallets as in years past.

Two players appear to be keeping the hot stove cool. MLB’s Hot Stove season is waiting for this year’s two biggest free agents to make their moves. The word in Vegas, where another MLB General Manager’s meeting is taking place at the luxurious Bellagio, is once Teixeira and Sabathia ink new deals, the flood gates will open.

Sabathia, sitting on a six-year, $140 million offer from the Yankees, supposedly favors residence on the west coast. However, can the Dodgers, Angels, or Giants really compete with the Yankees in a bidding war? If the Yankees weren’t so desperate for pitching, they’d put a deadline on their offer and call Sabathia’s bluff regarding a Pacific Ocean view. But that won’t happen. However, can the Dodgers really let Manny Ramirez leave, and then sign C.C. to a long-term deal at Manny-money? Mannywood fans would be outraged. The Giants certainly can’t outbid the Yankees, so they would need a real hometown discount to sign him. The Angels can compete with the Yankees, but at the expense of loosing Teixeira? I doubt they can afford both.

It will be interesting to see which is more important to Sabathia – money or the California lifestyle. For what it’s worth, I’d take less dough and be “California Dreamin’” over the Bronx. After all, what’s a little less at these ridiculous numbers? Plus, I’ve been to both places…and there is no choice.

Regarding Teixeira, get ready for an A-Rod type contract. The Red Sox appear serious about pursuing the gold-glove, high OBP, slugger. And when you add the Yankees and Angels into the bidding war, he’s sure to break the bank. There will be no financial crisis conversation with Boros when it comes to negotiations about Teixeira.

So let’s get on with it already. It’s December, and the stove needs to get hot. Hell, spring training is right around the corner….at least that’s what the snowbirds are telling me.

The current HOFN.com poll has an interesting question. Which do you most enjoy about the holiday season: Church, food, gifts, music, or parties?  Currently, parties lead the way with more than 50 percent of the vote.

When I asked a family member if he was surprised with the vote, he said no – and that he, too, voted for parties. However, he also stated that he would have preferred voting for “spirit” if it had been listed. However, doesn’t “spirit” actually encompass church, food, gifts, music and parties? Therein is the question…which ingredient of “spirit” of the holiday season matters most to each?

It’s sad, but not surprising, that church brings up the rear of the poll. For me, religion and beliefs are within the heart – not necessarily in a church. Maybe it has become the same for many, especially Generation X.

What pleases me most, however, is that ‘gifts’ is second to last – and, I hope, will finish dead last. The holidays have always been commercialized, but this has become overwhelming in recent years – and puts much too much pressure on families with a limited budget.

So, in retrospect, “parties” is the obvious choice for the most enjoyable aspect of the holidays. Gatherings bring together friends and create a festive mood….where cheer, food, music, laughter, and memories abound.

Isn’t that the true “spirit” of the holidays…celebrating life and love.

Happy Holidays!