It's that time of year AGAIN.

(If you're looking for Project Runway, either scroll down or click here so you won't have to be exposed to the baseball side of my personality)

It’s that time of year again, chickens! Yes, it’s the time of year when things around here get terribly, terribly confusing for everyone who comes around expecting talk about fashion, or cakes, or Tim Gunn and Swatch, or Gwyneth Paltrow, or reality TV, or. . .much of anything.

Because it’s the motherfucking playoffs, children. And it’s time, yet once again, Jordan’s Fearless and Fairly Illogical Postseason Picks.

As you may recall, this is where you and I match our picks for the postseason against those of the venerable Washington Post and FOX Sports' Lilliputian Ken Rosenthal. The highly scientific scoring system is as follows: in the Division Series, you get two points for picking the correct team and 1 additional point if you also pick the correct number of games. Points then double for each subsequent round (4/2 for the League Championship; 8/4 for the World Series).

You may also recall that last year, I started climbing back up in my own rankings after losing my "opposite power" over the Phillies -- that 2 year phenomenon wherein they did exactly the opposite of whatever I said they were going to do, whether that was winning or losing. And in the LOWEST SCORING Fearless and Fairly Illogical postseason of all time, the final scores came down the line as: Tyler 19; Jeni 18; JCD 14; jordanbaker: 14; Vittoria: 13;Beefy Muchacho: 8; Mighty Momogus: 8; Rebecca: 8; FOX: 6; WaPo: 6.

So that the Dealing in Subterfuges All-Time Wall of Fame now looks like:

2010: Tyler (19 points)
2009: Beefy Muchacho (34 points)
2008: I-66 (18 pts)
2007: FOX (20 pts)

2006: Jordan (23 points)

With Beefy Muchacho still holding the all-time record, and no one winning more than once.

So you know the rules, such as they are. My choices are governed by my gut and my fervent hopes, with the occasional limited influx of logic and statistics and whatnot. Yours can be governed by whatever you will. Leave yours—team and how many games it takes-- for the Division Series in the comments of this post, and remember that the Division Series is a best of 5 series, not best of 7.

So you can’t say “Phillies in 6!” for the NLDS and expect to get anything other than a serious mocking.

Two notes on the pros' picks before I unload my own: First, I'll update this post tomorrow when WaPo publishes their NLDS picks (Updated, 10/1. Second, Ken Rosenthal, in addition to being shorter than humanly possible, is a craven coward. He has picked the safe choice in every single match-up, and picked them each to take the full five games.

Moron.

My own, in case you hadn't guessed it, are going to be fearless and fairly illogical. And ruled entirely by emotion, as you could probably have figured out given that...hello, the Cardinals. And also the Diamondbacks, who I've drifted from in recent years because I never had that rooted, gut-based loyalty to them the way I do to St. Louis, and because I've come to love the Nationals so much. But the D-Backs are still friends -- friends I don't see much, and don't keep up with the way I should, but the kind where when we do see each other, we pick up right where we left off (for example, my eyes pricking up with happy tears when I heard that stupid, stupid "We Back the D-Backs" song faintly over the stadium loudspeakers after they won their last televised game) and have a good time.

So here goes. Starting, naturally, with the National League, since those teams actually play baseball:>

Phillies vs. Cardinals. Unless you just found this mad little outpost, you know exactly what I'm going to say and why I'm going to say it. I am a Cardinals' fan, born, bred, and generations back. And just to rehash what I said last year: "Phillies fans, you are bitches. Sorry, but you are a bunch of sad, ill mannered bitches, and you should all be rounded up and shot unless you all agree to start actually watching the sport instead of merely, merrily using it as an excuse for poor behavior."

But if you want a reason. If you want some logic or something. 1) The Phillies' record this season was .630. Their record against the Cardinals? .333. Yep. They dropped 6 out of the 9 games the two teams played (if you want the converse, the Cards had a .556 season average and a .666 average against the Phillies). 2) Momentum. Click on the "postseason" tag at the bottom of this post and see what I've said about momentum in the past. You could make an argument that both teams have some -- the Phillies, after all, just swept the Braves (and thank you for that, by the way) after stumbling through the middle part of September. But a late comeback from a team that's been considered a lock for the postseason since May is not the same as the kind of momentum a bunch of guys who've kicked, scratched, and bit their way back from the brink of elimination have.

Jordan says: Cardinals in 5

FOX says: Phillies in 5

WaPo says: Phillies in 3

Diamondbacks vs. Brewers.
I've mentioned before that I don't hate the Brewers and the Cubs the way I'm supposed to. I put this off mostly to their fans, who are just genuinely nice Midwestern types who respect a good game of baseball. But I always find it fundamentally amusing when they lose. It seems to restore rightness to the world somehow, to put things back in their appropriate place.

And frankly, I've begun to get a bit irritated when any NL Central team but the Cardinals even bothers to win the Division, because none of them do anything with it. They always fold. It can be in the first round, it can be in the series, but their failure to produce is just inevitable.

Also, I'm from Arizona. Don't look for logic -- the heat burned it out of me long ago. Let's just own this: it's a fact, Jack. I back, you back, we back the D-backs.

Jordan says: Diamondbacks in 5

FOX says : Brewers in 5
WaPo says: Brewers in 4

And now for that other league where they play some warped variation of baseball that does not require their fat sissy boy pitchers to actually play the game. The ALDS starts with a familiar match up; a repeat of last year:

Rays vs. Rangers. Can I just recycle what I said last year? I do still have my insane old man crush on Joe Maddon. The Rangers are still from Texas. And even though I was wrong, wrong, wrongity wrong about this last year, I'm sticking with my guns. 'Cause why? 'Cause MOMENTUM, that's why.

Jordan says: Rays in 4

FOX Says: Rangers in 5
WaPo says: Rangers in 4.

Finally, we have the Yankees vs Tigers. Confession? My Yankees hate is still in ebb because of my amazing experience at the old stadium, and having come to hate other teams more. But on the other hand,I really like Tigers' manager Jim Leyland. I like his friendship with Tony LaRussa. I like his old man moustache and the fact that his brother is a Catholic priest (I know, I know -- that is a random thing to like someone for... but it's just more evidence, to me, of what a solid old school guy Leyland is. I kind of feel the same way about his smoking).

What it comes down to for me, ultimately, is that New York came in at the top of a division where only one team came in under .500 (hello there, Baltimore. Suck it). Detroit is the only team in its division to come in above .500.

In fact, the AL Central was so bad this year that every team except the Tigers had a worse record than the .497 Washington Nationals. Suck that, every fan of one of those teams who's ever made fun of the Nats.

Jordan says: Yankees in 4

FOX says: Tigers in 5
WaPo says Tigers in 5.

So that's it, kids. Now go to -- leave your own picks in the comments.