NFL Week 8: Love Connection

"Welcome to Love Connection, where old-fashioned romance meets modern-day technology. Where you'll hear all the intimate details of a first date. Sometimes our dates have a happy ending, and sometimes there's just an ending. But it's always unpredictable when two strangers meet and try to make that....Love Connection!"

C'mon - who doesn't remember this show? I guess this should could be summarized as the family version of the Dating Game (which, I recall, we were not allowed to watch).

If you forget how this show worked, it's simple.  Love Connection featured a contestant that got to choose between three "choices" for a blind date. We got to know the main contestant - their background, dating preferences, personality - and then the audience got to see about a 15 second of the video snippets from each of the possible choices.

From that comprehensive personality screen, the audience got to pick what they thought would be the best match for the contestant. The contestant had already picked a choice, and they had gone on the first date before the show. We then see the choice on camera set up in the back room, and then everyone talks about the details of the date.

If the date went well, the lovers come out and meet each other and the show would pay for a second date. If not - well, they don't meet on stage and the show would pay for a date if the audience picked another person. That's it! No bonus round, no chance at $1000 jackpot.....

Chuck Woolery was the host for this show - and I have to saw he was the perfect fit for this type of show. For this show to exist in the 80s, you have to have an "innocent" host - and Chuck certainly fits this bill - but can make sly, subtle innuendos when needed. It can't be overt! I can't see someone like Wink Martindale or Dick Clark being able to do that second part.

I think this was the first show where most of the viewers - especially as a teenager watching - wanted to see the car wreck dates on the show. Who cares if a real "connection" was made and the couple hit it off? No! We wanted to see the arguments, yelling, and crying! It wasn't rare that the date went bad - but most of the times the conversations were civil. However, there were a few episodes when they couple went at each other and Chuck had to step in. That's when Layup or I would call each other to come to the TV room to watch.

One word: mullets. It was the majority of the hair style for the men in the profiles....it was the late 80s, you know!

The dating profiles of the candidates were always fun to watch. It showed their occupation -"car salesman" was never a good signal - and their marital status. Remember, this was the 80s, so "divorced" was still a stigma. I think the show never offered divorcees to "never been married" folks and for a divorced contestant, they only offered divorced profiles.

The computer generated statistics for the audience choices! Remember that? The high technology involved in tallying the audience votes? It was statistically significant that 43% picked the insurance salesman from Riverside over the 42% that picked the accountant from Bakersfield.

Sometimes, if the first match didn't work out, the contestant would come back on and talk about the second date - the date with the audience pick. If that didn't work, Chuck seemed to get a little suspicious of the contestant and seem to tell him "hey, it's not us, maybe you need to work on things...."

Finally, who can forget Chuck's signature line as they cut away to commercial - we will be back in "two and two"....two minutes and two seconds for the commerical break. Been using that line at the craps table asking for a hard four for 20 years.....

Oh - for those that care - out of the 22,000 or so couples on Love Connection, there were a recorded 31 marriages.....about 0.15%. Not the best success rate....

I think the Browns fans need to stage an intervention and revive the Love Connection game show for....our friend Johnny. Hey Johnny, we've got three dating choices for you. One of them is a Hollywood actress, the other two are quiet single ladies from Waterloo, Iowa and Troy, Ohio. Mr. Manziel has already been on the date with the wild actress - we learned it ended on the highway - and now we, as Browns fans, will pay for him to date a quiet girl to stay out of the lime light. Please, Johnny, take us up on our advice (and Chuck's advice) and tone it down.

On to the games:

KC 26, Det 13. Can't figure out how the Lions will score here, given their complete inability to run the ball. I think the Chiefs will get enough pressure on the Lions to force mistakes and easy scores.

Atl 30, TB 23. Maybe the Falcons aren't all that good after all. That's 3 games in a row now where they came out fairly flat vs. inferior competition. Tampa can score, but there's no defense there.

Bal 31, SD 20. I think the Chargers are done - like 1995 Browns done. It's clear they are leaving San Diego - so it's time to mail it in. I also believe Harbaugh can make the case for the Ravens to keep playing hard at 1-6; their schedule is so easy now....

Chi 27, Min 23. What exactly has Minnesota done so far this year? They have a fairly good D, but have no passing game to keep up with any kind of a shootout - and that's what I expect here.

Ten 20, Hou 17. LeBeau game planning against a limited Brian Hoyer and no Arian Foster? Zach M is not that much of a letdown from Mariota. I like the Titans here.

NYG 27, NO 20. Time for a letdown for the Saints. They've played 2 good games in a row; the Giants have laid 2 stinkbombs. Time for the Giants to take advnatange of the horrible Saints secondary.

Cin 30, Pit 27. No real idea who will win here. Should be a shootout, since I still think Pittsburgh is vulnerable to a good passing offense.

Stl 20, SF 19. I watched the Rams last week - they are very limited offensively; I think the 49ers can shut down the run and keep it much closer than expected.

NYJ 27, Oak 16. The Jets' pass rush vs. Derek Carr should cause major problems for the Raiders. An let's not forget, the Raiders' D is not all that good. I think the Jets win easy here.

Dal 19, Sea 16. I'm sorry, did the Seahawks' record move to 5-2 when I was not looking? They still have multiple problems on each line, and Dallas' O-line strength will take advantage.

GB 26, Den 24. Can't figure this game out, as there are so many questions on both sides. How good is Denver's D, really? Green Bay could only score 27 vs. the weak Chargers' D? How bad is Peyton? Let's sit back and get answers before diving in.

Car 23, Ind 13. Carolina is good, people. Their secondary is excellent and will take away a lot of the Colts' strength. And that front line getting pressure on Luck will force him into mistakes....


Best bets: 15 of them. Last week: 8-5-1 ; overall: 56-39-3
KC -3
Det/KC under 45
Bal -3.5
Chi +1
Min/Chi over 42
Ten +4
Ten/Hou under 43
NYG +3
Cin/Pit over 48 1/2
SF +8
NYJ -3
Dal +4.5
Sea/Dal under 41 1/2
Car -6.5
Ind/Car under 46 1/2

Supercontest: Last week: 2-3. Thanks a lot, Flacco. Overall: 20-14-1
Bal -3.5
Chi +1.5
SF +8.5
NYJ -2.5
Dal +6