f13.net

f13.net General Forums => Sports / Fantasy Sports => Topic started by: sickrubik on March 02, 2012, 03:17:51 PM



Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 02, 2012, 03:17:51 PM
Saints apparently had a bounty system and place under Defensive Coordinator Gregg Williams and after a lengthy investigation, could face stiff penalties. (Draft Picks, etc.)

http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Not-so-Saintly-Behavior.html

And now the Washington Post is reporting that the Redskins had such a bounty program in place under Gregg Williams as well.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/football-insider/post/new-orleans-saints-had-bounty-system-that-paid-for-injuring-opponents-nfl-announces/2012/03/02/gIQAPNDDnR_blog.html?hpid=z2

as "Drudge Reporty" as they are, Pro Football Talk suggests they should rip the Saints franchise tag away for the season...

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/02/league-should-consider-taking-saints-franchise-tag/

Really, with that second report from the Washington Post, I would not be surprised to see Gregg Williams get a significant suspension, if not banned outright.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 02, 2012, 03:25:59 PM
They are going to have to fire him. The NFL is dealing with concussion case backlash and rules changes on a huge safety campaign, only to have it come out that a D coordinator is trying to take people out of the game through bounties.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on March 02, 2012, 03:29:21 PM
Who? The Saints?  He's not with the Saints anymore anyway.  He's with the Rams now.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 02, 2012, 03:37:05 PM
Yeah, it'll have to be an NFL decision, and given the current climate of injury issues... I would expect to see a possible ban. They're going to be very tough.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/peter_king/03/02/saints.bounties/index.html


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 02, 2012, 07:02:33 PM
Who? The Saints?  He's not with the Saints anymore anyway.  He's with the Rams now.

No I mean the NFL will have to fire him. I guess that's a ban. But it's really a firing.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on March 03, 2012, 05:36:07 AM
Wow, this is a really unfortunate story. Time to drop the banhammer.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 03, 2012, 06:11:07 AM
I'm sure nothing will happen to the head coaches, who undoubtedly sanctioned said activity, nor to the players who participated willingly.

Edited to add:  And I think everyone is deluding themselves if they think that this doesn't go on all the time.  It's a violent sport.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 05, 2012, 08:07:29 AM
That reasoning needs to stop. You are not some unique flower that knows just how violent the sport is.

Of course it probably happens; the difference here is someone got caught red-handed at it.

"But EVERYONE'S doing it" stopped working when we were in high school.

The players will get big fines and suspensions, especially Vilma if the $10k hit on Favre can be corroborated. There's no reason to expect they won't get in trouble... they get big fines during the season for big hits. Mix that in with a commissioner who is clear on trying to make the sport safer.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 05, 2012, 08:25:48 AM
First and foremost it's a legal problem. That's why the NFL has to react. You can't encourage people to end careers.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 05, 2012, 09:37:18 AM
First and foremost it's a legal problem. That's why the NFL has to react. You can't encourage people to end careers.

Would not be surprising to see the IRS look into it as well.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 06, 2012, 02:57:59 PM
Colts set to release Manning. Irsay/Manning presser tomorrow.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 06, 2012, 03:00:03 PM
Colts set to release Manning. Irsay/Manning presser tomorrow.


Thank god. All the bullshit going on beforehand could fill a swimming pool. Let's just be done with this already Colts.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 06, 2012, 03:00:33 PM
It's the smart thing to do.  A $28 million bonus is a tough thing to swallow over a guy that just missed an entire year.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 06, 2012, 03:37:28 PM
Fffffuuuuu. It would have been better for us all if the Colts were dumb and signed him. Now we get to hear about him and who's going to pay for his services for weeks beyond what we already have


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on March 06, 2012, 03:45:58 PM
I think the Colts made a mistake.  The bidding war for Manning should be epic.  Time for wild speculation!  Jacksonville?  He could mentor that clipboard holder down there plus he could play the Colts twice a year for the lulz.

Jets?  I'm not sure he'd like Ryan's big mouth and I think the 'Sanchez' still has fans there.

I don't know, too many teams to think about.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on March 06, 2012, 03:47:17 PM
I kinda hope he just retires honestly. I doubt that he will... but what does he have to prove? He's Rich, He's won a superbowl, He'll go down in history of one of the greatest QBs of all time.

Take a break dude.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 06, 2012, 03:48:18 PM
Yeah, he should retire, but these idiots never do.  Not even Joe Montana was smart enough to pull that one.  Only Barry Sanders had it figured out, and he played on the shittiest team in the history of football.  These guys think they can keep playing at that elite level for an eternity.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on March 06, 2012, 03:50:24 PM
Like, I 'get it', when you play at THAT level of competition, it's really hard to let go... but still, dudes, you've had a great run, now relax and enjoy something else.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on March 06, 2012, 03:57:30 PM
Yeah, he should retire, but these idiots never do.  Not even Joe Montana was smart enough to pull that one.  Only Barry Sanders had it figured out, and he played on the shittiest team in the history of football.  These guys think they can keep playing at that elite level for an eternity.
Montana showed he could still play, though, leading the Chiefs to the AFC Championship game in the 1993 season. The Chiefs have not won a playoff game since that season :ye_gods:


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 06, 2012, 04:04:17 PM
Yeah, he should retire, but these idiots never do.  Not even Joe Montana was smart enough to pull that one.  Only Barry Sanders had it figured out, and he played on the shittiest team in the history of football.  These guys think they can keep playing at that elite level for an eternity.
Montana showed he could still play, though, leading the Chiefs to the AFC Championship game in the 1993 season. The Chiefs have not won a playoff game since that season :ye_gods:


Barry would have still been playing a number more years if he could have gotten away from the Lions. He's even admitted he only left because he didn't like playing for Detroit anymore (who could blame him at that time).


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 06, 2012, 04:07:15 PM
Manning was due to get $28M on Thursday (3/8/12), if he was not released. The Colts really had no other option and that's exactly why everyone just assumed he would not be a Colt in '12.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 06, 2012, 04:12:51 PM
I don't know many who assumed he'd be a Colt, I just wanted the Colts to be stupid so the media shit would come to an end faster.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 06, 2012, 04:14:08 PM
The media would just be talking about Luck learning from Manning, or what that Colts would get for the #1 pick, or how stupid they were for picking up the option. There will always be Manning.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 06, 2012, 05:08:20 PM
Barry was and is still my favorite football player. Broke my heart when he retired knowing what might have been. As for Manning, I dunno how he'll fit any system since he IS the system. The man is too cerebral for most Off. Coordinators.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 06, 2012, 10:13:46 PM
I kinda enjoy the speculation as to where he'll end up.  I think he goes to the 49ers.  He'll make Michael Crabtree into a pro bowler, and somehow even manage to get Vernon Davis to pull up his god damned pants already!


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Azuredream on March 06, 2012, 10:39:25 PM
Alex Smith had a good year though. Peyton's an improvement almost anywhere he goes, but it's not like SF is hurting at the QB spot. Quick look at his stats shows he got sacked a ton last year, wouldn't SF be better served trying to improve that kind of thing first?


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on March 06, 2012, 10:41:52 PM
It would be like the Karmic Wheel of Life if Peyton joined the Niners. Peyton replaced Jim at the Colts and now Andrew who was coached by Jim is likely to replace Peyton and finally Peyton joins with Jim at the end of his career.



Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 06, 2012, 10:44:53 PM
While I agree Alex had a good year, he had six or seven bad years before it.  He may turn out to be alright, but there is no compelling reason to be comfortable with Alex Smith as your QB.  

And anyway, any team that goes out an gets Peyton is going to be looking for some short term Super Bowl glory.  SF is in position for such a run.  Mostly, however, I picked San Fran because I am a Seattle fan, and nothing would hurt more.

Also, what Trippy said.  Football Karma is for realz.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on March 06, 2012, 11:03:23 PM
Makes the most sense in Arizona.  Look what we did for Kurt Warner and every one was pretty sure he couldn't play anymore.   Think of what we could do with Manning. :awesome_for_real:


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 06, 2012, 11:09:23 PM
Except that their owner (Bidwell?) is such a cheapskate that it is hard to imagine him even making the attempt, especially one year after overspending on Kolb.  He must still be smarting from that one.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on March 07, 2012, 05:40:08 AM
If it weren't for the fact that Shanahan won't give Manning the kind of control of playcalling he wants, the Redskins are the most likely to spend stupid money on a gamble as Daniel Snyder is about the worst at getting a bang for his buck when it comes to free agents.

I think someone at CBS offers him a big chunk of change to be their new booth analyst for their big games and he takes it. Phil Simms needs to be relegated to the minors, he is SO bad compared to Aikman and Collinsworth.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 07, 2012, 08:34:06 AM
He ain't retiring. If he was going to, he already would have. No, he's going to play for someone. The speculation of who is fun to discuss.

San Fran is the one team I think he could join that is the closest to a Super Bowl. Even at 75%, he'd put that team over the top. It won't happen, though. Alex Smith showed he has what it takes to win even if he's not going to be the guy you trust completely.

Arizona? Not happening. They don't have the money and they'd have to release Kolb because no way they are paying marquee money for 2 QB's and Kolb isn't going to be a clipboard holder after being named the starter TWICE.

Seattle would be a good fit, though I doubt Carroll is that smart. Also, he'd get creamed. It'd look like Favre's last year in Minnesota.

Miami is actually a pretty good fit - especially if the Colts let Reggie Wayne go. Wayne went to the U of Miami, he and Peyton are in sync and having Wayne on the other side from Marshall would turn that team into a threat.

Washington - Not going to happen. There aren't enough playmakers, they have no real running game and it's the place old QB's go to die. Snyder will try to overpay but it won't be about the money with Manning.

NY Jets - I really don't think this is happening. In essence, they'll be saying Sanchez wasn't the right choice and 2-3 years down the line when Peyton's about to retire, then what? Draft another QB? I also don't think he'd get along with Rex Ryan and the showboating atmosphere there.

Minnesota - We've seen this story before. The Ponder era has begun. Draft some wideouts that don't suck and build around AP and CP.

Baltimore - An intriguing proposition. Flacco has probably reached a wall (like Sanchez) and won't get better without help. Would love to see Manning to Boldin connection, but like Sanchez, if you get him, you're pretty much calling the Flacco era to an end.

Houston - More intriguing than the Baltimore scenario. Someone suggested Manning could go there if they could trade Schaub. Schaub would get a lot of offers, probably as high as a 1st round pick, but are you ready to do that in Houston? Because again, 2-3 years down the line you have to start thinking about succession plans. Is Schaub's injury history scaring you enough to drop him? I think it's a long shot, but it would certainly make Houston a favorite to reach the Super Bowl. And Manning would get to stick it to Irsay.

Kansas City - Ending the Matt Cassel era is probably a good idea. I don't think they have enough weapons to tempt Manning, though.

Denver - Is John Elway willing to trounce on Tebow's feelings to take a chance on an aging injured Hall of Famer? He's likely not going to do it for a 1st round QB but could Manning tempt him? And would it be a good idea? Not a chance in hell. That team does not have enough weapons to be a contender even with Manning, especially not if you are building your offseason plans around the way Tebow plays.

Absolutely Not Happening:
Green Bay
New England
Pittsburgh
Oakland (paid too much for Carson Palmer)
Chicago  :awesome_for_real:
Indy  :awesome_for_real:
Jacksonville (He wants a contender - and they are not that)
Tennessee (Already spent on an aging injured vet QB - the Jake Locker era is about to begin)
Cleveland (Not a contender)
Carolina
Atlanta
Dallas (Though Romo getting replaced for Manning would be  :why_so_serious:)
St. Louis
Tampa Bay
NY Giants  :awesome_for_real:
Philadelphia (Though he'd make that team insanely good, $40 million in Vick dollars ain't going away)
New Orleans
Buffalo (Just paid Fitzpatrick and Manning wouldn't go there anyway)
Cincy
San Diego
Detroit

Now that I examine it, I really think it's Miami or bust for Manning.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 07, 2012, 08:53:25 AM
Let's see:

Seattle, Miami, Arizona, and St. Louis led the league in giving up sacks, so those are out in my view. Nobody in their right mind would go there and hope to live after a neck injury.

My guess is Houston. Good line, great weapons, Schaub has been hurt and they can dump his contract without overpaying, playoff team already, AND he can give the big fuck you to the Colts when he plays them.

Besides, Schaub comes up for contract in 2013, and you can trade him for picks. Succession plan in 2013 when you get the next crop of young QBs? Hell yes.

Houston or bust!


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 07, 2012, 09:06:48 AM
I didn't realize Schaub's contract was up in 2013. That does change the optics a bit, though I still think Houston would rather keep the cheaper Schaub than Manning.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 07, 2012, 09:14:27 AM
I didn't realize Schaub's contract was up in 2013. That does change the optics a bit, though I still think Houston would rather keep the cheaper Schaub than Manning.

One or two years of Manning could put them in the Superbowl, however.  Schaub, in my opinion, isn't up to that task with the offense they have.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on March 07, 2012, 09:17:57 AM
How big of a wrinkle does Matt Flynn put into the Manning speculation? I assumed he was going to end up in Miami for scheme familiarity.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 07, 2012, 09:32:59 AM
How big of a wrinkle does Matt Flynn put into the Manning speculation? I assumed he was going to end up in Miami for scheme familiarity.

What are you thinking?  I don't follow.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on March 07, 2012, 09:46:01 AM
Some of these teams that were looking at Flynn have to be looking at Manning now, too. Who are they they prioritizing? Will Flynn not be signed until Manning is grabbed? I use Miami as an example because of the Packers' offensive coordinator, wouldn't Philibin be more comfortable with Flynn?


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 07, 2012, 09:49:52 AM
I would have to think that would be a no brainer.  I guess that Flynn has some potential.  He has done very well in his backup role, but Manning has won a superbowl.  I don't know how you can be a GM at that level and not worry at least about winning ASAP.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 07, 2012, 11:47:35 AM
No chance he goes to the 49ers. I would go so far as to say the odds are very strongly in favor of Alex having a better year than Peyton this year.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 07, 2012, 12:19:59 PM
Some of these teams that were looking at Flynn have to be looking at Manning now, too. Who are they they prioritizing? Will Flynn not be signed until Manning is grabbed? I use Miami as an example because of the Packers' offensive coordinator, wouldn't Philibin be more comfortable with Flynn?

First off, Manning WILL be the first free agent QB signed. If he isn't signed within 2 days after he's allowed to be signed, I'll be amazed. Flynn will probably go to whoever loses out on the Manning sweepstakes. Miami would have been my first thought for him before Manning, now it'll depend on Manning. I could see him landing in Cleveland, Washington or Seattle if Manning goes to Miami.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 07, 2012, 12:25:42 PM
I don't think Manning will just go to the highest bidder.  It could take longer than you think, because he'll have to balance money with the chance to win.  He doesn't want to play for Cleveland.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 07, 2012, 01:21:53 PM
I don't think Manning will just go to the highest bidder.  It could take longer than you think, because he'll have to balance money with the chance to win.  He doesn't want to play for Cleveland.

WHY DO YOU LIKE TO HURT ME?!

:why_so_serious:



Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 07, 2012, 01:33:12 PM
I don't think Manning will just go to the highest bidder.  It could take longer than you think, because he'll have to balance money with the chance to win.  He doesn't want to play for Cleveland.

He said Flynn could end up in Cleveland if Manning goes to Mia, no way in hell Manning is going to Cleveland. Though who picks up Flynn will also alter depending on who's willing to trade the farm for the #2 pick to pick up Griffin.

I do think SF is more likely than people will believe though for a few reasons. The primary reason would be that it's a super bowl contender already that has a free ride to the playoffs being in the NFC west if they have any sort of consistency (which it seems like they will only be better this coming year). Additional reasons imo:
-a package deal with Wayne could be possible (and a great fit for SF to have a veteran WR leading their WR team, which would double as a mentor to someone like Crabtree). I don't think it will happen but I don't think it's impossible either.
-the NFC West, outside of SF, isn't know for good defense, meaning it would be a great place for him to return to while rebuilding himself.
-He's either playing in nice weather or in domes
-No competition against his brother or other legendary QBs or very good defenses like he would have if he were to sign with Mia, Was, Minn, Sea, Ari, Cle, Cin, Stl, etc. Not going up against good defenses and being in good weather most of the year would be a great fit for him to play while he's rebuilding after the surgeries

More thoughts, though the following is just me blabbering about places some may or may not agree. I'm spoilering just because it really is my incoherent thoughts without money really being a factor in them


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 07, 2012, 01:45:34 PM
Jacksonville is a rebuild project no matter who you bring in. No way in hell he's going to the Jags.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 07, 2012, 01:54:53 PM
While I agree and admit it's almost guaranteed to not happen, it would be fun as hell if he did go there. They have the tools to beat Indy twice a year, a soft schedule with weak defenses to go against (most likely), favorable weather, a new owner shaking things up, lots of good points for Jac. IMO, it's more likely than some teams like WAS and Minn that some have been guessing he'll talk to.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 08, 2012, 06:58:08 AM
Manning wants to pick team in a week (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7659947/peyton-manning-aims-pick-team-week-sources-say)

I suspect that it will take longer than this unless he's just totally unconcerned with money, which would surprise me. 


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on March 08, 2012, 07:00:13 AM
I think the numbers he gets from anywhere are going to be pretty similar for a guy that a) wants to win and b) already has lots of money.  Well, that's unless Dan Snyder offers one of his eye blink contracts and just completely overpays.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 08, 2012, 07:39:20 AM
Manning would be a Grade A fool if he picked Washington.  Not only is it a graveyard for QBs, but he would be in a titanic struggle just to make the playoffs.  In fact, I honestly doubt he would make the playoffs.

Same goes for Miami, but the issues there are more just the competition he would have to face.  No playoff guarantees there...I would actually bet against him making the playoffs in year one.

West Coast is where he should be setting his sights.  San Fran would be a guaranteed playoff berth for him.  Seattle...not a guarantee, but still better than other options, and all the more likely because they desperately need a QB.  Oakland could work in theory, except for the sacrifice made for Carson Palmer, and the fact that I cannot imagine in a million years PM actually signing with that franchise.  Denver could work if they can reverse some of the retooling (and I think they could), and it wouldn't shock me to see Elway put Tebow back on the bench.  Hell, he is probably looking for a reason to do just that.  And I also think Denver would give him an almost guaranteed playoff berth in year one.  KC would be a mistake.  SD is off the table.  He'd be an idiot to go to either the Rams or Arizona.

So yeah, the smart thing to do would be San Fran, Seattle or Denver, in my opinion, under the hypothetical assumption that all three of those teams would be interested.  What he will actually end up doing is going to an East Coast team and failing miserably.

Or he will go to Houston.  If they are actually interested (which would actually surprise me a little), Houston might make the most sense for him.  The more I think about it, the better option that is than my three West Coasts teams above.
 


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 08, 2012, 07:47:25 AM
I think the Skins have no shot given Shanny has his son as OC and getting Manning means Jr. gets relegated to waterboy status. Not to mention, NFC east... I doubt he'd be up for being beaten by his little brother every year.  :why_so_serious:


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 08, 2012, 07:54:14 AM
I agree that the west coast is where he should go, but why would Ari be dumb at all? His only competition would be SF, there's an underrated defense, a decent run game, one of the best return men in the game, and Fitzgerald with room for Wayne if they want to bring him over as well. I'd say SF > Den > Ari > Sea > KC > Oak with STL and SD not even being in the picture. A new report came out today as well saying he'd prefer an AFC team over an NFC team.

I do like the article on PFT (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/07/caa-factor-looms-over-peytons-next-destination/) though regarding his agent and their clients possibly being an underrated factor in all of this. Basically, SF, Den, Buf, Jac, Minn, TB, STL and some others all are represented by the same agency that Manning is. I don't see that being a problem for any but SF or Den though since the rest either have QBs that aren't worth caring about or have in the case of STL would just keep their #2 pick and snag Griffin in the draft.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 08, 2012, 07:59:56 AM
Denver could work if they can reverse some of the retooling (and I think they could), and it wouldn't shock me to see Elway put Tebow back on the bench.  Hell, he is probably looking for a reason to do just that.  And I also think Denver would give him an almost guaranteed playoff berth in year one. 

Elway just wants to win, so whomever gives the team the best chance to do that, he'll play. Well, influence that, because it's still Fox's call. Anyway, if the Broncos DO land Manning (and from what people have been saying, it looks like they want him), they'll trade Tebow.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 08, 2012, 08:03:17 AM
Manning would be a Grade A fool if he picked Washington.  Not only is it a graveyard for QBs, but he would be in a titanic struggle just to make the playoffs.  In fact, I honestly doubt he would make the playoffs.


That can be said about most of the teams on his "list".


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 08, 2012, 08:22:15 AM
Denver could work if they can reverse some of the retooling (and I think they could), and it wouldn't shock me to see Elway put Tebow back on the bench.  Hell, he is probably looking for a reason to do just that.  And I also think Denver would give him an almost guaranteed playoff berth in year one. 

Elway just wants to win, so whomever gives the team the best chance to do that, he'll play. Well, influence that, because it's still Fox's call. Anyway, if the Broncos DO land Manning (and from what people have been saying, it looks like they want him), they'll trade Tebow.

Who would take Tebow in trade? He's not worth what the Broncos would probably want, and he's too big a fan favorite to just toss away for nothing. If they got Manning, they'd probably just keep Tebow unless someone turned their heads.

I just don't see Denver being a logical destination. They really don't have any of the kind of offensive weapons that Manning is going to want to play with. Think about Miami for a second - Brandon "Smack a Bitch" Marshall to throw to, Reggie Bush coming out of the backfield to catch passes and if they can sign Reggie Wayne, all of a sudden they are a bruising back and a slightly better O line from being a contender. They were playing really well at the end of the year with MATT FUCKING MOORE at QB.

I'm sure Dan Snyder WILL offer such obscene amounts of money it will make Goddell plotz. Manning would be fucking retarded to take it, especially since he really doesn't have to. There are so many more teams with better fits that will pay the already-filthy-rich Manning enough money to make it worth his while.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 08, 2012, 08:44:48 AM
Den and Mia have both already reached out (some report said 12 teams already have). I still like Mia, but facing Brady and NYJ twice a year need to be taken into consideration as well which hurts Mia.

Also - what would stop the Broncos from signing Wayne as well? They have just as good of weapons with a weaker division. Decker, Thomas, possibly adding Wayne for main weapons and a decent run game can be tempting.

I'm not sure myself but I just don't think they can be ruled out that easily


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on March 08, 2012, 09:19:12 AM
Who would take Tebow in trade? He's not worth what the Broncos would probably want, and he's too big a fan favorite to just toss away for nothing. If they got Manning, they'd probably just keep Tebow unless someone turned their heads.

I just don't see Denver being a logical destination. They really don't have any of the kind of offensive weapons that Manning is going to want to play with. Think about Miami for a second - Brandon "Smack a Bitch" Marshall to throw to, Reggie Bush coming out of the backfield to catch passes and if they can sign Reggie Wayne, all of a sudden they are a bruising back and a slightly better O line from being a contender. They were playing really well at the end of the year with MATT FUCKING MOORE at QB.

I'm sure Dan Snyder WILL offer such obscene amounts of money it will make Goddell plotz. Manning would be fucking retarded to take it, especially since he really doesn't have to. There are so many more teams with better fits that will pay the already-filthy-rich Manning enough money to make it worth his while.

Daniel Thomas was supposed to be the bruising back to complement Bush, though with the injuries he had in his rookie year the jury is still out on him.  The Fins still have Jake Long, so at least they have a solid left tackle.

As for who would take Tebow, I'd say he'd put asses in seats in Jacksonville.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on March 08, 2012, 06:47:46 PM
As for who would take Tebow, I'd say he'd put asses in seats in Jacksonville.

I am not sure Shahid Khan WANTS to put asses in seats in Jacksonville. Right now, Jacksonville is almost a lock for being the team that gets to move to L.A. in 3 years. If they start filling the stadium every week, that is harder to pull off.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 08, 2012, 10:31:39 PM
I agree that the west coast is where he should go, but why would Ari be dumb at all? His only competition would be SF, there's an underrated defense, a decent run game, one of the best return men in the game, and Fitzgerald with room for Wayne if they want to bring him over as well. I'd say SF > Den > Ari > Sea > KC > Oak with STL and SD not even being in the picture. A new report came out today as well saying he'd prefer an AFC team over an NFC team.

My main contention here is that it is more Arizona's ownership that is the problem.  Arizona has had one good year ever,  a couple of mediocre ones and a history of outright stinking.  Any success they have is a factor of good luck and good coaching, not because their ownership has any clue how to make a good football team.  Bidwell would just as likely sacrifice half his roster to find the money for Manning, he's a notorious cheapskate.  Not a place to go to win a Super Bowl, in my opinion.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on March 09, 2012, 05:21:22 AM
I am not sure Shahid Khan WANTS to put asses in seats in Jacksonville. Right now, Jacksonville is almost a lock for being the team that gets to move to L.A. in 3 years. If they start filling the stadium every week, that is harder to pull off.

(http://beardylollipop.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/major-league-lou-brown.jpg)


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 09, 2012, 07:45:02 AM
My main contention here is that it is more Arizona's ownership that is the problem.  Arizona has had one good year ever,  a couple of mediocre ones and a history of outright stinking.  Any success they have is a factor of good luck and good coaching, not because their ownership has any clue how to make a good football team.  Bidwell would just as likely sacrifice half his roster to find the money for Manning, he's a notorious cheapskate.  Not a place to go to win a Super Bowl, in my opinion.

Even bad owners have won championships. The thing to look at is how are they right now, which is better than some people realize and would instantly be a contender with Manning (even more so with Wayne to pair up with Fitz). They have cap issues for signing Peyton, but I can't see him holding out for the kind of money he was making if his main goal is winning. That, and Bidwell is in Florida currently (where Manning and Wayne are), meaning even as a bad owner he sees that he'd be crazy to not at least make an attempt


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on March 09, 2012, 10:30:20 AM
I am not sure Shahid Khan WANTS to put asses in seats in Jacksonville. Right now, Jacksonville is almost a lock for being the team that gets to move to L.A. in 3 years. If they start filling the stadium every week, that is harder to pull off.

(http://beardylollipop.files.wordpress.com/2010/10/major-league-lou-brown.jpg)

Oh god, you got me good there.



Title: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 09, 2012, 08:49:25 PM
The Rams Trade the #2 Pick to the Redskins (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7668243/source-washington-redskins-acquire-no-2-overall-pick-st-louis-rams)

So the Skins will get Robert Griffin III, and all they had to give up was 3 1st round picks (2012-2014) and their 2nd round pick this year. Holy fucking shit, this kid better be lights out. The article says they'll still be going after Manning but I don't see that being a good idea at all. The cap space he'd eat up they are going to need to sign free agents to upgrade like everywhere on that team. RG3 has got literally nothing to throw to.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 09, 2012, 08:53:36 PM
Guess that means Manning ain't going to the Skins.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on March 09, 2012, 08:56:33 PM
The Rams Trade the #2 Pick to the Redskins (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7668243/source-washington-redskins-acquire-no-2-overall-pick-st-louis-rams)

So the Skins will get Robert Griffin III, and all they had to give up was 3 1st round picks (2012-2014) and their 2nd round pick this year. Holy fucking shit, this kid better be lights out. The article says they'll still be going after Manning but I don't see that being a good idea at all. The cap space he'd eat up they are going to need to sign free agents to upgrade like everywhere on that team. RG3 has got literally nothing to throw to.

Good thing they franchised Fred Davis!   :awesome_for_real:


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 10, 2012, 03:53:38 AM
Having Manning for a year or three wouldn't be a bad thing at all for the Redskins.  It's not like they'll have high level draft picks to pay in the future.   :grin:

I would think it would be a great investment.  Manning may not be a great teacher (who knows, really), but being around that level of greatness can be a good example to the right person.  By all accounts RGIII is a great kid with a good work ethic, so maybe it will rub off on him.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on March 10, 2012, 09:58:24 AM
Manning has been pretty clear on the point that he doesn't want to be in the same division as his brother, preferably not the same conference. So that rules out the Skins.

Miami/Denver/KC/Seattle look like the most likely places he'd end up.

edit: Manning met with John Elway and the Broncos yesterday. (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8277cfbc/article/peyton-manning-to-meet-with-broncos-on-friday-?module=HP11_cp)


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on March 10, 2012, 10:20:03 AM
If the coaching staff let's Manning run the offense the way he did in Indy, then Miami would be the best landing spot for him imo.  Especially if they pick up Wayne and Clark for him, who along with Marshall and Bush would make that offense suddenly pretty potent.  Plus Miami had the sixth best scoring defense in the league last year as well (iirc?) so Patriots and Jets or not, Manning/Wayne/Clark would make the Fins a pretty strong contender.

My biggest fear was the Dolphins would pull off some move like the Redskins did for RGIII.  Not that I think Griffin won't be good, but what the Redskins gave up to move up 4 spots is just crazy.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on March 10, 2012, 10:40:02 AM
My bet is Manning goes to Denver and Miami picks up Flynn.

Elway fucking loathes Tebow, and Peyton is about the only person he could bring in that would not outright offend the colorado Jesus freaks that worship the ground that Tebow walks on. They will still be pissed but not like they would be if he brought in someone with a less squeaky clean image than Peyton.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on March 10, 2012, 11:03:48 AM
Even losing three good players to drug suspensions for 4/6 games next year?


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on March 10, 2012, 12:01:41 PM
The Rams Trade the #2 Pick to the Redskins (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7668243/source-washington-redskins-acquire-no-2-overall-pick-st-louis-rams)

So the Skins will get Robert Griffin III, and all they had to give up was 3 1st round picks (2012-2014) and their 2nd round pick this year. Holy fucking shit, this kid better be lights out. The article says they'll still be going after Manning but I don't see that being a good idea at all. The cap space he'd eat up they are going to need to sign free agents to upgrade like everywhere on that team. RG3 has got literally nothing to throw to.

Well, we knew someone was going to take that pick, but honestly I don't see RG3 as being worth that much.   


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 10, 2012, 02:05:54 PM
Who would take Tebow in trade? He's not worth what the Broncos would probably want, and he's too big a fan favorite to just toss away for nothing. If they got Manning, they'd probably just keep Tebow unless someone turned their heads.

Jags. He's a god there. I would be fine if they do keep him, but this could very well just be a chance to say "okay, we're moving on from the tebow experiment".

I just don't see Denver being a logical destination. They really don't have any of the kind of offensive weapons that Manning is going to want to play with. Think about Miami for a second - Brandon "Smack a Bitch" Marshall to throw to, Reggie Bush coming out of the backfield to catch passes and if they can sign Reggie Wayne, all of a sudden they are a bruising back and a slightly better O line from being a contender. They were playing really well at the end of the year with MATT FUCKING MOORE at QB. 

I think you're undervaluing the broncos players just a bit, and the Reggie Wayne point is kind of moot, as you can say the exact same thing about the Broncos. Wherever Manning goes, they'll make the Offense for him.

The only real advantage Miami has is that it's in Florida, which is a huge one for Manning.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 10, 2012, 03:29:41 PM
I don't think I'm undervaluing the Broncos' offense. I don't think they have ANYBODY besides Tebow in that offense that would work as well outside of a Tebow offense. They'd be mediocre at best. Now their defense is pretty damn good and likely to get better. But that offense? No.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 10, 2012, 09:46:50 PM
Given the "strategy" employed by the Broncos under Tebow, they had some lighter numbers, but they have a strong O-Line, McGahee had a great year, and Decker/Thomas did decent and Thomas showed some great potentia this year. Royal proved before that he can be good, but in that current system was not utilized, but he can be a great slot receiver. Of course, he's a free agent this year.

I think Thomas could have a 1200 yard season with Manning. McGahee is getting older, but probably has at least 1 or 2 seasons left in him.

They were far from the best, but they are not terrible, and could seriously do great with Manning, I feel.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on March 12, 2012, 08:29:59 AM
If Denver can get Manning and sign one speedy outside receiver, they could be legit.  Reggie Wayne doesn't quite have the jets he used to, but I think he is on the market right?  Wouldn't be surprised to see him sign wherever Peyton does.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 12, 2012, 08:39:23 AM
While Wayne isn't as fast as he was 10 years ago, Denarius Thomas is one of the fastest in the league. So they have a speedy outside receiver, and if they picked up Wayne they'd have a very solid WR group. Where they'd be lacking, imo, would be at TE, though they could very well have a hidden gem with all of their TE either being 6'4 or 6'5 at 250lbs. So they measure in well, I just don't know if they can compare with Clark as a receiving option.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2012, 10:51:53 AM
Well, Clark was cut. I would LOVE to see the Broncos land Manning, Wayne and Clark. What the hell, throw in Saturday.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2012, 12:18:51 PM
Per Adam Schefter (https://twitter.com/#!/AdamSchefter):

Cowboys lose $10 million in cap space, Redskins lose $36 million in space. Can split it over 2012 and 2013 any way they want. All that money goes to 28 other teams -- $1.6 million each -- except for Saints and Raiders, who don't get any but don't lose any.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 12, 2012, 01:12:48 PM
They lost the cap space because they front-loaded deals during the uncapped year. Seems a bit harsh but I hate them both, so fuck them. $36 MILLION for the Skins though? OUCH. So much for a free-agent shopping spree to get RG3 some weapons.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on March 12, 2012, 01:43:43 PM
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

Fucking Redskins and Cowboys.


HAHAHAHAHAHA

Thanks you for some extra cap space. kthx


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 12, 2012, 02:09:01 PM
They lost the cap space because they front-loaded deals during the uncapped year. Seems a bit harsh but I hate them both, so fuck them. $36 MILLION for the Skins though? OUCH. So much for a free-agent shopping spree to get RG3 some weapons.

Reason #1,467 why having your owner as GM is fucking retarded. You can't even really hope Jerry keels over dead as a fan because his fuckstick son is in charge of our scouting and would inherit the team.

We have no realistic hope of winning the division at this point.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Zetleft on March 12, 2012, 02:17:13 PM
Sonofabitch

On the bright side at least they will prob dump off Newmans useless ass. 


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2012, 02:27:44 PM
Coming from a Broncos fan, I can certainly understand how much Shannahan can really fuck up the cap.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on March 13, 2012, 06:58:11 AM
Denver does not need Wayne.  Denarius with Manning throwing to him might even be a 1st round WR pick in fantasy.  The guy is big, fast and can move after the catch.  Wherever Tebow goes, I hope for his sake they have an O-line.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 13, 2012, 07:26:11 AM
Denver does not need Wayne.  Denarius with Manning throwing to him might even be a 1st round WR pick in fantasy.  The guy is big, fast and can move after the catch.  Wherever Tebow goes, I hope for his sake they have an O-line.

What self-respecting team that has a good O-line would want Tebow?  That's when you want a great pocket passer.

Not that you aren't right.  It's a bit of a catch 22 for him.  Maybe the will let him go to college again?

And by the way, fucking Seattle, in case you haven't noticed, you NEED A GODDAMNED QUARTERBACK.  Feel free to do something about that, stupid fuckers.  And no, not Tim Tebow.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2012, 07:34:40 AM
Denver does not need Wayne.  Denarius with Manning throwing to him might even be a 1st round WR pick in fantasy.  The guy is big, fast and can move after the catch.  Wherever Tebow goes, I hope for his sake they have an O-line.

It would be a stretch, a huge stretch to assume Denarius would be that good. I said I think he would get a 1200 yard season, but not a lot of people are going to grab someone who is essentially nameless int he first. You could pick him up easy in the 2nd or 3rd.

As for not needing him. Yeah, who wants TWO good receivers.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 13, 2012, 09:28:29 AM
Denver does not need Wayne.  Denarius with Manning throwing to him might even be a 1st round WR pick in fantasy.  The guy is big, fast and can move after the catch.  Wherever Tebow goes, I hope for his sake they have an O-line.

What self-respecting team that has a good O-line would want Tebow?  That's when you want a great pocket passer.

Not that you aren't right.  It's a bit of a catch 22 for him.  Maybe the will let him go to college again?

And by the way, fucking Seattle, in case you haven't noticed, you NEED A GODDAMNED QUARTERBACK.  Feel free to do something about that, stupid fuckers.  And no, not Tim Tebow.

I can see Seattle being in play for Flynn. Hell, Leinart is available...  :why_so_serious:


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 13, 2012, 01:46:28 PM
Dolphins trade Brandon Marshall to Da Bears (http://espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/story/_/id/7682163/2012-nfl-free-agency-miami-dolphins-trade-brandon-marshall-chicago-bears-sources-say)

Welp, so much for Manning to Miami. I do not see that cast of also-rans being able to attract Peyton Manning, and signing a Reggie Wayne isn't going to do it. He's probably best as a #2 receiver these days.

The Bears however, got a significant upgrade and only gave up 2 3rd round picks (2012 and 2013). Of course, after the ransom they paid for Cutler, their draft pick cupboard might still be bare, and they still have to get SOMEBODY to block for Cutler. And resign Forte. And keep Brandon Marhsall from choking a bitch.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on March 13, 2012, 01:54:18 PM
So much for Brandon Marshall's fantasy value.  I don't trust any WR on the Bears.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on March 13, 2012, 01:56:26 PM
If the Fins commit to going all in on Manning that limits their ability to approach Flynn. I could easily see Manning going to Denver, Flynn going to someone like Seattle and Miami ending up getting shafted.

As a Bears fan, I'm pretty content with that trade.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on March 13, 2012, 01:58:06 PM
Dolphins trade Brandon Marshall to Da Bears (http://espn.go.com/chicago/nfl/story/_/id/7682163/2012-nfl-free-agency-miami-dolphins-trade-brandon-marshall-chicago-bears-sources-say)

Welp, so much for Manning to Miami. I do not see that cast of also-rans being able to attract Peyton Manning, and signing a Reggie Wayne isn't going to do it. He's probably best as a #2 receiver these days.

Unless they also go for a Vincent Jackson.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on March 13, 2012, 01:58:26 PM
So much for Brandon Marshall's fantasy value.  I don't trust any WR on the Bears.

You were going to put faith in Henney over Cutler? Or were you assuming Manning was going to the Phins?


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Sauced on March 13, 2012, 02:45:59 PM
The Bears however, got a significant upgrade and only gave up 2 3rd round picks (2012 and 2013). Of course, after the ransom they paid for Cutler, their draft pick cupboard might still be bare, and they still have to get SOMEBODY to block for Cutler. And resign Forte. And keep Brandon Marhsall from choking a bitch.

They were back at full picks last year, actually.  The 3rd they used this year was the pick they got for Greg Olsen last year, so they still have 3 picks in the top 80.

Now that they aren't dumping a fortune on Vincent Jackson or Mario Williams, they can pay Forte, or they can look at Eric Winston at OT who got cut in Houston for some reason.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on March 13, 2012, 02:54:12 PM
So much for Brandon Marshall's fantasy value.  I don't trust any WR on the Bears.

You were going to put faith in Henney over Cutler? Or were you assuming Manning was going to the Phins?

I just assume a Bear's quarterback doesn't know what a wide receiver is and/or WRs magically forget how to play when going to Chicago.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Sauced on March 13, 2012, 03:00:36 PM
The Bears "passing game coordinator" is Jeremy Bates, who was the OC in Denver when Cutler/Marshall had back-to-back 100 catch seasons.

Not that that means a damn thing in 2012, but still.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on March 13, 2012, 03:02:54 PM
He stopped in Seattle to run our offense into the ground after that, so gl.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 13, 2012, 03:04:59 PM
Yeah, but he had Tavaris Jackson at QB, so he might have had an excuse.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Sauced on March 13, 2012, 04:09:48 PM
He stopped in Seattle to run our offense into the ground after that, so gl.

If he was the OC, I'd be worried.  Technically, he's the QB coach.  I'm hoping Tice comes up a new "BM Ratio" for his passing game.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 14, 2012, 12:10:30 AM
Reggie Wayne is apparently telling the world he wants to stay in Indy...we'll see.  Kinda hard to believe.

Vincent Jackson has signed with the Bucs.  I don't know what to think about that.  Way to make yourself irrelevant?

Bears got a good deal getting Marshall.  Honestly, personality issues notwithstanding, I can't think of a better option for them.  Suddenly makes Hester a little more dangerous as well.

The thing about Matt Flynn...I am not buying in.  I am aware of his six touchdown game.  I am also aware that it was only like the second game he's ever played, and we do not have nearly enough to judge him on.  There is every chance that he will not be successful whereever he ends up.  Just by leaving Green Bay, he instantly becomes a lesser player.

Edit:  And Garcon to the Redskins, apparently.  Garcon was obviously better for playing with Manning, so I don't know what to think about this move.  Kinda meh.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on March 14, 2012, 06:09:08 AM
Flynn is good. He came in for an injured Rodgers on a Thursday night game in Dallas a couple years ago and almost won the game, he played for an injured Rodgers against the Patriots in 2010 and did not make major mistakes and barely lost, and he had the last game this year where he played as perfect a game as you can expect a QB to play.

He is more of a sure thing than ANY rookie QB as he has actual NFL experience against good teams.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 14, 2012, 06:14:46 AM
Flynn is good. He came in for an injured Rodgers on a Thursday night game in Dallas a couple years ago and almost won the game, he played for an injured Rodgers against the Patriots in 2010 and did not make major mistakes and barely lost, and he had the last game this year where he played as perfect a game as you can expect a QB to play.

He is more of a sure thing than ANY rookie QB as he has actual NFL experience against good teams.

I will agree that he is more of a sure than than any rookie QB.  Primarily because I think rookiee QBs are a total crapshoot. 

Still, take him out of the GB environment, away from the team and coaching staff...and I don't know.  I actually hope Seattle lands him, but I still don't think we have enough reason to believe he is top 16 NFL talent.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 14, 2012, 07:18:05 AM
Nice pick up by the Bears with Marshall, I like it. Now if only they could pick up some new O-linemen.

Edit:  And Garcon to the Redskins, apparently.  Garcon was obviously better for playing with Manning, so I don't know what to think about this move.  Kinda meh.

The Skins will have an upgrade at QB and two new WR (Josh Morgan as well as Garcon), and a potentially good run game if they can stay healthy. So these WR moves will not get as much attention as they deserve, but it's a huge upgrade for the Skins. Garcon also did have his best year yet in 2011 - without Manning. Additionally, they're supposedly working on signing Eddie Royal, meaning next years Redskins could be a completely turned around team.


Welp, so much for Manning to Miami. I do not see that cast of also-rans being able to attract Peyton Manning, and signing a Reggie Wayne isn't going to do it. He's probably best as a #2 receiver these days.

Supposedly it's the opposite as Manning didn't want to play with Marshall.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 14, 2012, 08:20:25 AM
With Jackson off the market, Marshall fucked off to Chicago, Garcon in Washington, Colston back in New Orleans, the only marquee guys left for Miami to sign are Manningham (LOL) and Wayne? I do not see either of those guys making Miami an attractive target for Manning. Maybe Wayne, but again, I don't see him as a big #1 threat anymore. Of course, Manning can make anyone better than they appear but that's looking less likely to me now and Arizona more likely. Manning to Fitzgerald would be scary as fuck but they better get some blocking.

As for Jackson to Tampa, they just signed Carl Nicks (G) from the Saints and cornerback Eric Wright (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7684603/tampa-bay-buccaneers-add-carl-nicks-eric-wright-signing-vincent-jackson). I think if you give Freeman time to throw, he's good and Jackson can make that team better. But yeah, I think Jackson's fantasy value just went down.

Meachem goes to the Chargers, Finnegan to the Rams, Garcon to the Skins. Of those deals, I think Garcon was the best. Garcon is a deep threat - his biggest weakness is an more than occasional case of the dropsies.

Flynn is a LOT better than anybody else on the market or in the draft other than Manning, IMO. He's going to end up being the Matt Hasselbeck type, IMO. He came one minute away from beating the Patriots in 2010 with a Green Bay team that, while it won the Super Bowl that year, had not hit its stride. They still hadn't even qualified for the playoffs at that time, and their running game was almost nonexistant until Starks took off in the playoffs. The Pats defense in 2010 was better than it was last year, and keep in mind that his 6 TD game came against Detroit, who had one helluva pass rush. As long as he has SOMEBODY to throw to, he will be good. He's got poise, a decent arm and makes good decisions.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on March 14, 2012, 08:36:14 AM
And keep Brandon Marhsall from choking a bitch.

Well, that didn't take long.  (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/football/nfl/03/14/brandon.marshall.ap/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a6&eref=sihp)


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 14, 2012, 08:42:15 AM
And keep Brandon Marhsall from choking a bitch.

Well, that didn't take long.  (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/football/nfl/03/14/brandon.marshall.ap/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a6&eref=sihp)


  :facepalm:


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 14, 2012, 09:06:12 AM
Atlanta radio folks are losing their minds over the fact the Falcons aren't doing diddly-shit in FA, nor do they have any draft picks.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 14, 2012, 09:10:00 AM
The Falcons seriously need to wave a shitton of money at Mario Williams.

And Brandon Marshall... oh what body part of a woman won't you punch?  :facepalm: :facepalm: :facepalm:


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 14, 2012, 09:48:25 AM
There is some thought that Marshall being jettisoned could increase Miami's chance of landing Manning, given that he hates dealing with shitheads.

It's sad... I felt so terrible for Marshall after Darrent Williams was shot... but the fucker has not done himself any favors. I was glad when the Broncos shipped him out.

Still, as much of a dickhead he is, especially to women (and the reason I really dislike him), the biggest WTF was still the McDonalds Wrapper/TV incident. That outdid Brian Griese's dog incident as the most klutzy things a Bronco has done.


Title: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 14, 2012, 11:24:18 AM
Brandon Lloyd is visiting San Francisco today, wouldn't be my first choice but the WRs are dropping off the board quickly.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on March 14, 2012, 12:32:54 PM
They already got Moss so now they are just looking for a 3rd wide receiver to split time with Crabtree and Moss when he feels like resting :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 14, 2012, 12:35:32 PM
Assuming Morgan resigns I could be content with Crabtree/Moss/Lloyd/Morgan, although that's a lot of attitude at one position.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 14, 2012, 12:42:38 PM
Just be glad you didn't end up with Marshall.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on March 14, 2012, 12:47:02 PM
Assuming Morgan resigns I could be content with Crabtree/Moss/Lloyd/Morgan, although that's a lot of attitude at one position.

He's a Redskin.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 14, 2012, 12:48:04 PM
Doh, oh well.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on March 14, 2012, 12:49:35 PM
Just be glad you didn't end up with Marshall.
Moss is more than enough by himself. It'll be interesting to see how Harbaugh handles all these "personalities".


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 14, 2012, 01:46:54 PM
Did I miss Moss' near weekly beating of women?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on March 14, 2012, 01:55:22 PM
I didn't say Moss was the worst.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 14, 2012, 02:05:30 PM
Moss was always too stoned to do too much beating of anything or anybody.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on March 14, 2012, 02:26:51 PM
i gotta say I'm pretty pleased so far with what the Bucs have done. Adding the 5th selection in the draft to the FA signings and hopefully they won't melt down and just flat our quit next year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on March 14, 2012, 02:36:28 PM
Titans interest in Manning is pretty surprising but good news.  Titans or Fins, I don't want him going anywhere else.  Peyton playing back in TN would be awesome!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on March 14, 2012, 03:23:26 PM
i gotta say I'm pretty pleased so far with what the Bucs have done. Adding the 5th selection in the draft to the FA signings and hopefully they won't melt down and just flat our quit next year.

They still need to improve that offensive line and could use a good third down back since Blount apparently has hands of stone, but otherwise they could have a pretty good offense.  I think Freeman's problems last year had a lot to do with receivers who couldn't get open, ever.  Jackson will be a nice big target and Mike Williams might bounce back a bit since he won't be the only receiver worth covering.  Bucs defense still needs a lot of work though, even with the signing of that corner.

Tennessee might be a good landing spot for Manning if Kenny Britt's knee is fully recovered, especially if they can also get Wayne to play the other side.  If not, Manning wouldn't have anyone to throw to there so he should probably look elsewhere.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 14, 2012, 04:05:07 PM
i gotta say I'm pretty pleased so far with what the Bucs have done. Adding the 5th selection in the draft to the FA signings and hopefully they won't melt down and just flat our quit next year.

They still need to improve that offensive line and could use a good third down back since Blount apparently has hands of stone, but otherwise they could have a pretty good offense.  I think Freeman's problems last year had a lot to do with receivers who couldn't get open, ever.  Jackson will be a nice big target and Mike Williams might bounce back a bit since he won't be the only receiver worth covering.  Bucs defense still needs a lot of work though, even with the signing of that corner.

Tennessee might be a good landing spot for Manning if Kenny Britt's knee is fully recovered, especially if they can also get Wayne to play the other side.  If not, Manning wouldn't have anyone to throw to there so he should probably look elsewhere.

Guess you missed the bit about Reggie Wayne staying in Indy, or is there another Wayne I am forgetting?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on March 14, 2012, 04:08:58 PM
Guess you missed the bit about Reggie Wayne staying in Indy, or is there another Wayne I am forgetting?

I thought that was just a rumor.  Has he actually signed?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 14, 2012, 04:31:14 PM
Guess you missed the bit about Reggie Wayne staying in Indy, or is there another Wayne I am forgetting?

I thought that was just a rumor.  Has he actually signed?

http://www.indystar.com/article/20120314/SPORTS03/203140317/Colts-receivers-Reggie-Wayne-returns-Pierre-Garcon-gone?odyssey=nav|head


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 15, 2012, 12:09:56 PM
And Mario Williams goes to Buffalo (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7690355/buffalo-bills-close-deal-mario-williams-source-says).

6 years, $100 million with $50 million guaranteed. Welp, that certainly changes things. Buffalo really needed a defense, and this should certainly help them. But in that division, who knows? The impact of one player is probably a lot less than in other places. And this guy just came off a season-ending injury, though not a severe one. Luckily, the injury also didn't involve his legs or knees, which the turf in Buffalo might be very hard on. That whole division could be the new version of the old Black and Blue NFC Central.

Also, Sanchez just pissed himself.  :why_so_serious:

EDIT: Peyton Hillis goes to the Chiefs. The Cowboys signed Brodney Pool (Safety) from the Jets to improve what is a wretched defensive backfield.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on March 15, 2012, 12:51:19 PM
Dammit. Was hoping the Hawks would land Williams, but when they resigned Red Bryant I guess that ship sailed.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sauced on March 15, 2012, 12:58:27 PM
Still can't get over the Brandon Marshall shit.  Was hoping we could make at least one run at a title before this shit happened!

Now, I guess, I get to know how Steelers fans feel every time they cheer for their team.  Technically, this was already true, but at least he married the woman he scrapped with (and who stabbed him back for it?  crazy kids.)!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 15, 2012, 05:51:40 PM
but at least he married the woman he scrapped with

what.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 16, 2012, 03:10:45 AM
but at least he married the woman he scrapped with

what.

I think what he is saying is that it is okay to clobber the woman if you are married to her.  Because then she's your property and stuff. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 16, 2012, 04:15:23 AM
but at least he married the woman he scrapped with

what.

I think what he is saying is that it is okay to clobber the woman if you are married to her.  Because then she's your property and stuff. 

(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33271127/ccave.jpg)

Wait a god damn minute... this isn't Politics.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 16, 2012, 09:26:28 AM
Apparently, one of his arrests/dustups with the law involved his then girlfriend, now wife, stabbing the motherfucker.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on March 16, 2012, 09:30:38 AM
Manning has ruled out Miami; so it's Denver or Tennessee.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 16, 2012, 09:39:17 AM
I have a god damned ulcer waiting on this Manning stuff.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 16, 2012, 09:55:53 AM
I have a god damned ulcer waiting on this Manning stuff.

Why?  He's gonna tank once his neck gives out again. :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 16, 2012, 10:11:42 AM
Manning has ruled out Miami; so it's Denver or Tennessee.

According to Chris Mortenson, there's also a clandestine team involved.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 16, 2012, 10:25:26 AM
Manning has ruled out Miami; so it's Denver or Tennessee.

According to Chris Mortenson, there's also a clandestine team involved.

Have a link? Everything I've seen at this point is Denver vs Tennessee, including Mortenson's chatter.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on March 16, 2012, 10:26:15 AM
Hey, you asssholes, Arizona still gets mentioned.  Stop pretending we don't exist.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 16, 2012, 10:27:35 AM
Apparently Miami is just TRYING to fuck itself over in the QB madness.

Report: Dolphins make low-ball offer to Matt Flynn (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/16/report-dolphins-make-low-ball-offer-to-matt-flynn/)

Hey, you asssholes, Arizona still gets mentioned.  Stop pretending we don't exist.  :awesome_for_real:

I try to forget Arizona exists at any possible chance.

EDIT 1: Denver flew out to talk to Manning and watch him throw. Reportedly offering $60M over 5 years, $30M gauranteed. Same deal abouts as Tennessee's.

EDIT 2: Here's that mysterious third team. Wow.

Quote
Filed to ESPN: Third team in Manning race that has emerged is 49ers - Manning worked out for Harbaugh & took physical this week (https://twitter.com/#!/mortreport/statuses/180715600677584897)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 16, 2012, 11:22:11 AM
Fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on March 16, 2012, 11:28:17 AM
i gotta say I'm pretty pleased so far with what the Bucs have done. Adding the 5th selection in the draft to the FA signings and hopefully they won't melt down and just flat our quit next year.

As a Rutgers Alumni, Schiano sucks.  Great recruiter, terrible game-day coach.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on March 16, 2012, 11:37:00 AM
Alex Smith hasn't actually put pen to paper has he?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on March 16, 2012, 12:09:03 PM
Nope.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 16, 2012, 12:11:39 PM
SF would be a great fit. Much better than the shitpile in Tennessee.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 16, 2012, 12:45:00 PM
Sorry, Cards out of the running.

Quote
ESPN’s Suzy Kolber reports that the Arizona Cardinals have decided to pay quarterback Kevin Kolb’s $7 million offseason roster bonus. The decision formally removes Arizona from the Peyton Manning sweepstakes. (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/16/cardinals-are-paying-kevin-kolbs-7-million-roster-bonus/)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on March 16, 2012, 12:48:41 PM
UGGGGGGGGG. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.  Kolb is so bad.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on March 16, 2012, 01:05:13 PM
i gotta say I'm pretty pleased so far with what the Bucs have done. Adding the 5th selection in the draft to the FA signings and hopefully they won't melt down and just flat our quit next year.

As a Rutgers Alumni, Schiano sucks.  Great recruiter, terrible game-day coach.

As one of the few Bulls fans here, I can't stand Schiano either.  I'm almost hoping the team goes winless this year to get him out as fast as possible.

Edit: I think Kolb and Cassel is the reason for Miami's 'lowball' offer to Flynn.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on March 16, 2012, 01:27:04 PM
They think Seattle likes Tavaris Jackson that much?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on March 16, 2012, 02:47:48 PM
Peyton to the Titans I say. 
  • Titans just signed Steve Hutchinson (G) to bolster their O-Line and he is friends with Peyton.
  • Titans have one of the best RB's in Chris Johnson (who got his 'fuck you' money last season and skated admittedly).
  • Titans have an above average offense with Washington (1k+ receiver), Hawkins (solid 4th year receiver), and Stevens (outstanding TE blocker.)
  • Tennesse loves Peyton way more than they love even the QB who got us the National Championship in '98, Tee Martin. Would generate a lot of excitement for a state that only sees Big Orange (UT college football).
  • Bud Adams has extended his unnatural life on the blood of puppies and the hope of winning a Super Bowl; Peyton is his last chance.
    I expect a "Shut up and take my money!" offer.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 16, 2012, 02:48:45 PM
He has to play against Eli this year if he signs with the Niners, too.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sauced on March 16, 2012, 03:36:59 PM
I think what he is saying is that it is okay to clobber the woman if you are married to her.  Because then she's your property and stuff. 

Nah, I was joking.  I'm in denial, since I really don't like rooting for scumbags.

Doubtful that the Bears can pay for Wimbley, but it would be great if they could get a pass rusher before the draft.  They could go into it without needing a savior.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 16, 2012, 11:46:36 PM
I still maintain Manning's best chance to win a Super Bowl this year is the 49ers. God, that team would be just nut-crushingly difficult to beat if he's even remotely close to what he was before. The Cardinals are goddamn idiots not to sell Kevin Kolb's blood to pay for Manning. Good luck with the guy who couldn't supplant a dog killer.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 18, 2014, 05:13:03 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/18/flynn-picks-the-seahawks/related/

And the maniacal laughter shall commence... :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 18, 2014, 05:21:41 PM
Man you know you are a terrible franchise when you're getting outgunned by the Seachickens.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 18, 2014, 11:32:58 PM
I still maintain Manning's best chance to win a Super Bowl this year is the 49ers. God, that team would be just nut-crushingly difficult to beat if he's even remotely close to what he was before. The Cardinals are goddamn idiots not to sell Kevin Kolb's blood to pay for Manning. Good luck with the guy who couldn't supplant a dog killer.

I think I said as much a couple pages ago, and still agree with this.  They also just added Mario Manningham, so that is another offensive weapon.  Really, if Peyton is in shape, they would be absolute monsters.

And Flynn to the Seahawks.  Yay?  God, I hope he pans out.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 19, 2014, 05:47:28 AM
It is worth mentioning that Alex Smith is talking to the Dolphins.  He might be feeling a little bit spurned, and Miami needs to do something.  If he signs with Miami and then Peyton ends up NOT signing with San Fran...then there is a reasonably good chance we could all see a pretty significant regression for the Niners next season.  The potential pendulum swing here is actually quite vast.  They have had really good defense and running games before.  The biggest changes last year were in the coaching staff and the QB play.  What would happen if the QB play disappears again?  Back to 7-9, suckas.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 19, 2014, 06:30:09 AM
How Miami went from having all these potentials to virtually nothing in the matter of a month is staggering, though I'd suspect mostly media created. But still... astounding. And the 49ers... sheesh. At least Miami has a starting QB, no matter how mediocre Moore is. I think Manning goes to Tenn. If that is the case, Hasselbeck should be available.

And good to see the Browns are yet again dormant. I so enjoy these 5-11 seasons...  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 19, 2014, 06:37:05 AM
How Miami went from having all these potentials to virtually nothing in the matter of a month is staggering, though I'd suspect mostly media created. But still... astounding. And the 49ers... sheesh. At least Miami has a starting QB, no matter how mediocre Moore is. I think Manning goes to Tenn. If that is the case, Hasselbeck should be available.

And good to see the Browns are yet again dormant. I so enjoy these 5-11 seasons...  :oh_i_see:

5-11?  Pretty optimistic...

You might be right about him going to Tennessee, but I think it would be a damn mistake on his part.  I mean, that is a weak division, but he would still be fighting against Houston for the division.  If he went to the Niners though?  Pretty much guaranteed to make the playoffs, and a team that is instantly MUCH better than the team that went 13-3 the year before.  Seems like a no brainer to me, but it really depends on what his true motivations are.  At the end of the day, it wouldn't surprise me at all for even a good guy like Peyton Manning to go after the money.  They all fucking seem to.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on March 19, 2014, 06:44:57 AM
You say that like it makes no sense. He has his Hall of Fame career.  If you don't go for the money now, then when? 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on March 19, 2014, 06:56:07 AM
He's already set for life; he needs a salary that's not offensive at a team that can give him his second ring. I suspect the ring matters more than the money to him at this point.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 19, 2014, 07:04:15 AM
He's already set for life; he needs a salary that's not offensive at a team that can give him his second ring. I suspect the ring matters more than the money to him at this point.

Yeah, I would like to think so.  I'd like to think that is how I would act.

But it all to often ends up coming down to the money.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on March 19, 2014, 07:08:58 AM
But it all to often ends up coming down to the money.
This. You're thinking with a non-rich brain, no rich person is ever set for life.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 19, 2014, 07:11:06 AM
But it all to often ends up coming down to the money.
This. You're thinking with a non-rich brain, no rich person is ever set for life.

Yep, exactly that.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 19, 2014, 07:47:09 AM
Given all this PM crap, both my Broncos and Niners are going to be in a huge lurch if they lose out on Manning. Right now, the Broncos have 1 QB on their roster, Tebow, and there's talk that he's going to demand a trade no matter how this Manning thing pans out. Now with Smith talking to teams, it looks like the Niners could easily end up in that same boat. There's a good chance either Broncos or Niners starting QB could be Matt Hasselbeck.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 19, 2014, 08:07:25 AM
Tebow demanding a trade? I would LOVE to see that shit, because the market for him is exactly fuckall. MAYBE Jacksonville goes in because their owner loves him, but really? The Broncos would be lucky to get a 3rd rounder for him. And really, leaving the Broncos would bring a startling quick end to his career as a starting QB.

Flynn signs with the Seahawks? Congrats on getting a real goddamn QB for a change. Who knows, he might have been a product of being a championship caliber team, or he might just be Hasselbeck 2.0. But he'll be a goddamn huge improvement over Tavaris Jackson. Seattle has a running game, some nice young wideouts. They probably need an O line, but in that division, I could easily see Flynn getting them in contention.

Oh Dolphins. Is there anything you can't fuck up? First you trade Brandon Marshall, then you lose out on Peyton Manning AND Matt Flynn and now you're courting Alex Smith? This is your fallback plan? I've been a cheerleader for Smith in the past, but I do not think he can go into a situation like Miami has and be good enough to push that franchise into the playoffs, especially without a #1 wideout or a bruiser back like Gore. Matt Moore may well be the best QB they can get. Oh and they signed David Garrard, so at least they'll have some playoff experience. They have failed to get anybody this offseason, and traded away their best player. Philbin is not a miracle worker, and I feel bad for him, because he's going to be terrible with this group of players.

Even if they don't sign Manning, I don't see the Niners regressing that bad. Sure, they might only win 10-11 games, but in that division, their biggest challenger is likely to be Seattle. And it isn't like Smith has been known to be a big-time QB. His biggest positive last year was cutting down on the number of INT's. He won them a few games, but I don't think it was anything that required a great quarterback, just not a bad one.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on March 19, 2014, 08:45:25 AM
His biggest positive last year was cutting down on the number of INT's. He won them a few games, but I don't think it was anything that required a great quarterback, just not a bad one.

I think you nailed that.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 19, 2014, 08:51:18 AM
Broncos land Manning!

And as expected, Tebow to be dealt.

And of course, I just had to:



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on March 19, 2014, 09:03:44 AM
Confirmed (https://twitter.com/#!/nfl/status/181772552207745024); so now we just have to see where all the pieces land.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 19, 2014, 10:13:01 AM
Well fuck. I really wanted to see him in San Fran.

Buh-bye Tebow time. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 19, 2014, 10:16:21 AM
I am hoping the Numerology Nuts get a hold of the Manning/Broncos thing. Peyton being #18 (6x3 or 666). I will love all of this that much more.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on March 19, 2014, 10:41:28 AM
Well fuck. I really wanted to see him in San Fran.

Buh-bye Tebow time. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

In better news, Demaryius Thomas just skyrocketed on my fantasy meter.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 19, 2014, 11:03:08 AM
Well fuck. I really wanted to see him in San Fran.

Buh-bye Tebow time. Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out.

I'd take Tebow right now on the Cowboys as a backup for Romo.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on March 19, 2014, 11:04:14 AM
I doubt he wants to be a backup though; if he was content to be a backup then there'd be no shortage of great teams eager to have him. As a starter though...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 19, 2014, 11:23:21 AM
I don't know if he has that choice. He may have to be a backup, unless Miami or Jax takes him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 19, 2014, 11:25:51 AM
I don't know if he has that choice. He may have to be a backup, unless Miami or Jax takes him.

He won't, because he's going to be traded.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 19, 2014, 11:29:55 AM
If they find a dancing partner. I don't think the market looks that good for him now, and I think he might be just straight up cut when push comes to shove.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on March 19, 2014, 12:01:40 PM
The Niners would take him :awesome_for_real: He could be the second coming of Steve Young :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 19, 2014, 12:06:40 PM
(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/131/399/fry.PNG?1307468855)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on March 19, 2014, 12:12:35 PM
:why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 19, 2014, 01:35:21 PM
Jerry might take him for one of our 5th rounders we never use.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 19, 2014, 01:59:17 PM
 :awesome_for_real:

(http://i.imgur.com/TgUqA.jpg)

</reddit>


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on March 19, 2014, 02:53:07 PM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Peyton!

We would have made you a GOD here in TN!  Now you're just a stupid donkey. Oh who am I kidding, I'll still root for him to win another Super Bowl.

Meanwhile, Eli smiles as he realizes that if he punches one more hole in his sub club card he gets a free one.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Johny Cee on March 19, 2014, 02:54:43 PM
If they find a dancing partner. I don't think the market looks that good for him now, and I think he might be just straight up cut when push comes to shove.

Even leaving aside the fact he did take a terrible Denver team and somehow get them not only into the playoffs, but to the AFC Championship game?  Tebow will dramatically increase the profile of any (shitty) team he goes to, increase viewership, and move merchandise....  at least until he's proven to be a bust.  He should be a steal for someone so they can flog Tebow-mania in the offseason to promote the brand, at the very least, as long as he isn't pricing himself too high.

When you consider how many mediocre or bad QBs get starting jobs?  I would be amazed if he wasn't sewn up pretty quickly.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on March 19, 2014, 02:56:59 PM
Problem with Tebow as a backup is that he doesn't strike me as a great system QB.  Backups are usually good as backups because they can slide in and do a respectable job.  Tebow doesn't strike me as that kind of guy, he did well in Denver last year because they overhauled the offense to fit him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 19, 2014, 03:06:54 PM
The problem with bringing Tebow in as a backup is the fans. They will be SCREAMING for him to start the first time the starting QB throws an INT. It's the same damn reason he started over Brady Quinn in Denver even though Quinn was #2 on the depth chart - the fans were howling for him to start in training camp. No coach is going to want to put his starting QB through that (and himself as well in the press conferences he'll have to deal with) and if it's a young QB to boot (like Gabbert in Jacksonville), how damaging is that going to be to your confidence? Not to mention if you really want to make sure Tebow is usable, you really have to build a team around his skillset. He's such a unique player, you aren't going to do that if he's a backup, and as a backup, he'll be a completely different set of offensive plays to your starter. You don't bring him in as a backup, especially not if the reason you want him is to sell tickets.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on March 19, 2014, 03:23:14 PM
The fans in Jacksonville probably would pay to see him, but LA couldn't give two shits about Tebow and I still think that the Jaguars are betting on being in LA for the 2015 season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 19, 2014, 03:26:07 PM
The problem with bringing Tebow in as a backup is the fans. They will be SCREAMING for him to start the first time the starting QB throws an INT.

As a Dallas fan, I fail to see the problem here. I hate my starter with the fire of a 1,000 suns.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on March 19, 2014, 03:32:03 PM
If they find a dancing partner. I don't think the market looks that good for him now, and I think he might be just straight up cut when push comes to shove.
Even leaving aside the fact he did take a terrible Denver team and somehow get them not only into the playoffs, but to the AFC Championship game?
Denver got crushed by the Patriots in a Divisional playoff game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 19, 2014, 03:32:11 PM
If they find a dancing partner. I don't think the market looks that good for him now, and I think he might be just straight up cut when push comes to shove.

Even leaving aside the fact he did take a terrible Denver team and somehow get them not only into the playoffs, but to the AFC Championship game?  Tebow will dramatically increase the profile of any (shitty) team he goes to, increase viewership, and move merchandise....  at least until he's proven to be a bust.  He should be a steal for someone so they can flog Tebow-mania in the offseason to promote the brand, at the very least, as long as he isn't pricing himself too high.

When you consider how many mediocre or bad QBs get starting jobs?  I would be amazed if he wasn't sewn up pretty quickly.

Given that most teams know he'll probably be straight up CUT, there's no reason to sell the farm to get him. Plus, the tebow factor started to have diminishing returns towards the end of last season. It makes the team completely one dimensional. Given a full off-season to work out, I think he would get better, but the Tebow Offense would not work as well this next season as it did this one. And I think most teams know that. Also, the defense had a LOT to do with the success in those games. During the big stretch of wins, the Defense kept the opposing team to low enough points that last minute heroics would push the Broncos up over. It was definitely not "all tebow".


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on March 19, 2014, 04:15:48 PM
Pats recruit him and retrain him as a Tight End. Calling it now.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 19, 2014, 05:07:08 PM
Pats recruit him and retrain him as a Tight End. Calling it now.

Belicheat worships Satan, so I'm thinking no.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 19, 2014, 05:16:40 PM
McDaniel's crush on Tebow may overwhelm Hobochek's satanism.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on March 19, 2014, 06:49:51 PM
Why not just keep Tebow and put him in for the 4th quarter every game?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 19, 2014, 07:02:20 PM
In a perfect world where tebowners and christians aren't crazy, that would be great. But, the Broncos are just going to want to move on from the circus. Imagine the craziness if Manning has one bad DOWN, let along bad quarter/game.

It's best to just move on and regain control over your own team.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 19, 2014, 07:07:31 PM
No he needs 3 quarters of sucking to warm up to the point where he can play decently for a quarter.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on March 19, 2014, 07:12:00 PM
Why not just keep Tebow and put him in for the 4th quarter every game?

Assuming this wasn't a troll post, I'll take a hurt Peyton Manning over Tebow in the 4th quarter of a game any day.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on March 19, 2014, 07:29:47 PM
No he needs 3 quarters of sucking to warm up to the point where he can play decently for a quarter.


Tebow needs a bullpen.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 19, 2014, 07:46:09 PM
No he needs 3 quarters of sucking to warm up to the point where he can play decently for a quarter.


Tebow needs a bullpen.

Or a fluffer.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 19, 2014, 07:53:36 PM
Jesus is his fluffer.

Wait.... no, that's about right.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 19, 2014, 08:06:10 PM
I thought Tebow was a fluffer, of a sort.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on March 19, 2014, 09:09:49 PM
If Alex Smith actually goes to the Dolphins, I will be forced to conclude he hates winning, and was completely depressed last season. He wants to get back into his comfort zone.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 19, 2014, 11:19:13 PM
Tebow should go to Jacksonville.  I mean, Blaine Gabbert really, really stinks.  It is also impossible to be a successful NFL QB with a name like Blaine Gabbert.  Seriously, though, Tebow would put people in the seats down there in the short term...though who knows if the new owner even cares about that at this point.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: El Gallo on March 20, 2014, 04:42:02 AM
Even leaving aside the fact he did take a terrible Denver team and somehow get them not only into the playoffs, but to the AFC Championship game?  

I don't think it's fair to say Denver was "terrible." They had the #1 rushing offense in the league and an average-ish defense.  I also don't think it's fair to say that the guy with a 45% completion percentage, 72.9 passer rating, and the absolute lowest pass yards per game of any of the 34 QBs listed on nfl.com's QB list http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/passingYardsPerGame carried the Broncos to the playoffs.    And they didn't go to the AFC Championship game; they lost 45-10 to the Pats in the second round.  Tebow had a statistically impressive first round win vs the Steelers, who had the league's #1 defense during the regular season.  They were, however, missing 4 out of 11 defensive starters for most of the game and totally sold out against the run almost every play.  Speaking of the Steelers, note that Kordell Stewart actually did "lead" a team to two AFC title games.

 
Quote
Tebow will dramatically increase the profile of any (shitty) team he goes to, increase viewership, and move merchandise....  at least until he's proven to be a bust.  He should be a steal for someone so they can flog Tebow-mania in the offseason to promote the brand, at the very least, as long as he isn't pricing himself too high.

This is 100% true.  He could save the Jaguars, for example.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: El Gallo on March 20, 2014, 04:44:02 AM
Pats recruit him and retrain him as a Tight End. Calling it now.

Belicheat worships Satan, so I'm thinking no.

How could he resist an opportunity to break the Nazarine? 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 20, 2014, 08:24:31 AM
It'll be interesting to see where the money falls, but so far no mention of guaranteed money in the reports of the final price tag of 5 years, $96M for Manning.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 20, 2014, 08:38:36 AM
I think Manning just wants to play and win a Superbowl.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 20, 2014, 09:09:13 AM
2012: 18M
2013-2014: 40M w/waver on neck
2015: 19M
2016: 19M

And yeah, apparently no guaranteed money. Allows broncos to cut him after 1 year if he's not healthy, or renegotiate.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 20, 2014, 09:47:11 AM
That's really a smart contract for both sides. Manning doesn't NEED the money and it's a good way to prove to the fans that he came to give them a Super Bowl, not fleece the franchise.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 20, 2014, 10:42:02 AM
Okay, so there is gauranteed money.... the $18 for the first year. Which is still a fantastic freaking deal for both sides.

http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_20213659/peyton-mannings-deal-broncos-5-years-96-million


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 20, 2014, 12:48:01 PM
The problem with bringing Tebow in as a backup is the fans. They will be SCREAMING for him to start the first time the starting QB throws an INT.

As a Dallas fan, I fail to see the problem here. I hate my starter with the fire of a 1,000 suns.

Hey man, you got Kyle Orton backing up Romo. You're covered.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 20, 2014, 12:54:15 PM
I can't think of a team I'd wish Tebow on more than the Cowboys, I say they go for it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 20, 2014, 01:08:11 PM
Tebow to the Raiders. COME ON!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 20, 2014, 01:13:02 PM
I can't think of a team I'd wish Tebow on more than the Cowboys, I say they go for it.

If Tebow ended up chasing Orton around the league...

Tebow to the Raiders. COME ON!

I LOVE YOU SO MUCH RIGHT NOW.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on March 20, 2014, 01:17:55 PM
He needs to commit a crime first, you silly.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 20, 2014, 01:21:22 PM
He needs to commit a crime first, you silly.

He stole the minds of many fans... does that count?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on March 20, 2014, 01:36:04 PM
Tebow should back up Vick.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 20, 2014, 01:37:55 PM
No wait... think about it. Tebow in Black and Silver and Davis returns from the dead. Or, see how the Raider nation consumes god's chosen gridiron champion. This shit writes itself people... MAKE THIS HAPPEN!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on March 20, 2014, 01:51:34 PM
So much ugly in one picture.

(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/111434/ugly.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on March 20, 2014, 02:23:16 PM
Man, it is amazing how much I still want to punch Elway in the face just for being Elway. I should be ashamed of myself.

PS: Orange is a hideous primary team color and no one will ever convince me otherwise.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on March 20, 2014, 02:33:00 PM
Elway is in that photo? I thought that was a horse.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 20, 2014, 02:36:22 PM
Well Elway's mouth goes rather well with Peyton's forehead, spatially.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on March 20, 2014, 02:45:54 PM
Well Elway's mouth goes rather well with Peyton's forehead, spatially.

Nice.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 21, 2014, 01:05:14 AM
Yes, those carzy NFL fans.  Go fuck yourself, drgbrghrv412.

Man, it is amazing how much I still want to punch Elway in the face just for being Elway. I should be ashamed of myself.

PS: Orange is a hideous primary team color and no one will ever convince me otherwise.

I am fully onboard with both of these statements.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 21, 2014, 09:04:59 AM
Alex Smith resigns with the Niners (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7715336/2012-nfl-free-agency-san-francisco-49ers-alex-smith-agree-new-contract-sources-say), 3-year deal, $8 million a year, $16.5 million guaranteed.

Welp, it's official. Miami may be the saddest franchise in the entire NFL. The Colts will get Luck, the Skins get RG3, the Seahawks get Flynn, and even Alex Smith turns you down. Oh and your best offensive player left is the fragile Reggie Bush. What is it about Miami that just turned all these guys away? I mean, at least in Cleveland you know there's nobody coming to rescue you, but Miami had glimmers of hope last year. I don't see any positives out of what they've done so far and a whole bunch of negatives. Moore may have done well last year, but how's he going to do with no #1 wideout (or even a legit #2)?

Weird trade - Demeco Ryans to the Eagles from the Texans for draft picks (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7715442/philadelphia-eagles-acquire-demeco-ryans-houston-texans). Not sure I get this one. The Eagles get a solid linebacker, though with some injury history, and the Texans get an extra 4th round pick and they move up 12 places in the third round. For a team that had such a good defense last year, it seems strange to trade away your captain after losing your big-name pass rusher in free agency. I guess they decided to go younger on the defense? Just seems a weird trade.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 21, 2014, 09:11:20 AM
Miamuh has been pretty much a turd since Marino retired, and it was a borderline turd through much of his career. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 09:43:55 AM
Oh snap, here it comes.

Sean Payton suspended one year. Mickey Loomis 8 game and $500,000 fine. Saints fined $500,000 and a second round pick in 2012 and 2013.

Additionally, Gregg Williams suspended indefinitely.

EDIT: Tebow to the JETS for a 4th. _JETS_. Lawl.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on March 21, 2014, 09:45:49 AM
HAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 21, 2014, 09:51:01 AM
Wow. Can he be worse than the Sanchize? Nope.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 09:54:17 AM
Quote
So Tim Tebow traded and Sean Payton suspended a year at the same time. that's a fun minute in NFL history. (https://twitter.com/#!/greggrosenthal/status/182508870172815361)

 :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 09:55:42 AM
So, odds on Brees demanding a trade now to get away from this madness?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 21, 2014, 09:57:18 AM
OH MY GOD.

A FOURTH FUCKING ROUND PICK FOR TEBOW? Jesus, how little fucking faith in Sancheese do you have to have to trade that high a pick for Tebow? With a running game that was terrible last year and a QB whose biggest problem is accuracy, and you trade for a QB with a career accuracy rating of 47%????? Stunning. Absolutely gobsmacked. There is no way this was a good idea. Sanchez's already fragile psyche in a locker room fragmented as fuck with no confidence in their QB and they bring in a guy that the Jesus freaks will be howling to start the minute Sanchez throws an INT? Could this possibly be the dumbest fucking trade EVER? I'm not sure which team will suck worse, Miami or the Jets.

The Payton suspension is fucking HUGE. Problems with Brees' contract, a GM and coach suspended, and who is going to coach? The NFC South is up for grabs this year, IMO. I assume the O Coordinator for the Saints would take over for the year because how you going to hire someone from outside the organization for only a year?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 21, 2014, 09:57:34 AM
My city of Atlanta is literally dancing in the hallways over the Saints taking it up the pooper on this bountygate.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on March 21, 2014, 09:58:42 AM
No first round picks? That's weak.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 21, 2014, 09:58:55 AM
They ought to be. They've done fuckall in free agency and haven't looked to improve themselves. If Carolina can get any sort of defense this year, it could be a 3 or 4 team race.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on March 21, 2014, 10:03:45 AM
Tebow in NYC. That might be enough to get me to watch that Rumspringa. So much for him wanting to be back in the South / Florida via trade. You could not be any farther from that type of culture if you moved to Europe.

I seriously can't fathom why the Jets went this way... unless they make Timmy into an H-back.  :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on March 21, 2014, 10:32:05 AM
Tebow in NYC. That might be enough to get me to watch that Rumspringa. So much for him wanting to be back in the South / Florida via trade. You could not be any farther from that type of culture if you moved to Europe.

I seriously can't fathom why the Jets went this way... unless they make Timmy into an H-back.  :uhrr:

I have no idea what the Jets were thinking.  Lets back up our shitty QB with an even shittier one that is going be bringing even more of a media circus to a team that desperately needs to shut the fuck up and lose the drama, not add to it.  My god, the Jets implosion this year is going to be absurd.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 10:45:50 AM
A friend in Jersey texted me the following: "Omg I need to move."

This is the most exciting off-season in a LONG time.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 21, 2014, 11:01:44 AM
Holy shit.  Sean Payton suspended for a year (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7718136/sean-payton-new-orleans-saints-banned-one-year-bounties).   :ye_gods:

That's crazy.  

Quote
"A combination of elements made this matter particularly unusual and egregious," Goodell said. "When there is targeting of players for injury and cash rewards over a three-year period, the involvement of the coaching staff, and three years of denials and willful disrespect of the rules, a strong and lasting message must be sent that such conduct is totally unacceptable and has no place in the game."


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on March 21, 2014, 11:05:28 AM
Tebow to the Jets is a major  :uhrr: 

I can't figure out their angle here.  He isn't a good QB, their team isn't in great need of a utility player if they want to play him in that role.   I guess Sporano is coming in and wants to run the wild cat? 

I would've actually been interested to see him go to New England or something, they actually have a track record of using players like this effectively.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 11:09:07 AM
I would've actually been interested to see him go to New England or something, they actually have a track record of using players like this effectively.

Plus McDaniels wants to make out with him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 21, 2014, 11:17:24 AM
Wow. Can he be worse than the Sanchize? Nope.

He was last year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on March 21, 2014, 11:35:03 AM
So, odds on Brees demanding a trade now to get away from this madness?

Maybe he can be traded to the Dolphins!  :why_so_serious:

Seriously, the Fins started their downward slide under Wayne Huizenga by wrecking the front office and Stephen Ross is even worse.  Right now Miami probably has the worst front office in the league and Ross is more interested in selling bits of the team to celebrities than fielding a competitive product.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 21, 2014, 11:38:35 AM
Tebow to the Jets still just floors me. The fucking media circus that surrounds that team just got amped up to OVER 9000!!!!!!!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on March 21, 2014, 11:44:23 AM
Tebow to the Jets still just floors me. The fucking media circus that surrounds that team just got amped up to OVER 9000!!!!!!!

The Jets are the Kardashians of the NFL.

Bye Timmy, thanks for the memories.  You could hear Elway smile from a coast away.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on March 21, 2014, 11:53:08 AM
You could hear Elway smile from a coast away.

This is the real story I think.  Denver just washed its hands of a year (at least) of controversy over something that shouldn't even be one to begin with.  I think they actually could have gotten more than they did for him, but just getting him out the door for anything was worth it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 11:54:28 AM
If they could have, they would have.


Bye Timmy, thanks for the memories.  You could hear Elway smile from a coast away.

You could also see it from a coast away.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 21, 2014, 11:56:04 AM
I'm pretty sure that was just the sun glinting off his horse teeth.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 21, 2014, 11:56:52 AM
Suspending a superbowl winning coach for a year is absolutely crazy.  That is a death sentence, I would think.  The Saints have no choice but to fire the guy, I would think. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 21, 2014, 12:13:12 PM
Wow. Can he be worse than the Sanchize? Nope.

He was last year.

Sanchize had a 78 QB rating and misssed the playoffs. Tebow had a 73 rating and got to the second round. I mean if we're splitting hairs, I'm taking the guy who has the intangibles when I have to pick QBs who can't muster an 80 rating over a whole season. Tavaris Jackson and Ryan Fitzpatrick were technically better than both of them, and I wouldn't put either on my NFL team.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on March 21, 2014, 12:13:55 PM
Crazy, no.  The league had to come down hard and I applaud the move even if it is out of complete panic.  Bounties cannot exist.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 21, 2014, 12:14:14 PM
Sanchez's entire team hates him.  That has to count for something.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 21, 2014, 12:14:59 PM
Crazy, no.  The league had to come down hard and I applaud the move even if it is out of complete panic.  Bounties cannot exist.

I agree with the move.  I'm just surprised they did it.  I'm flat out shocked, personally, that the NFL had the nads to bring down the hammer.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 12:37:21 PM
Sanchize had a 78 QB rating and misssed the playoffs. Tebow had a 73 rating and got to the second round. I mean if we're splitting hairs, I'm taking the guy who has the intangibles when I have to pick QBs who can't muster an 80 rating over a whole season. Tavaris Jackson and Ryan Fitzpatrick were technically better than both of them, and I wouldn't put either on my NFL team.

Being so one-dimensional that teams can stack the box and send three pass rushers with minimal deep field coverage and watch Timmy run for his life and eventually go down with the ball is an intangible?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 12:40:56 PM
I have no idea why, but SOMEONE hasn't posted this here yet.

http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/2012/03/a-savior-comes-to-new-york.html

Quote
Son, I don’t have faith in anything except the taste of a fine cigar and pertness of sixteen-year-old thighs. You two dimestore Rick Mirers are gonna have to duke it out on the field.

That may be the finest prose in modern literature.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ginaz on March 21, 2014, 12:59:49 PM
I have no idea why, but SOMEONE hasn't posted this here yet.

http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/2012/03/a-savior-comes-to-new-york.html

Quote
Son, I don’t have faith in anything except the taste of a fine cigar and pertness of sixteen-year-old thighs. You two dimestore Rick Mirers are gonna have to duke it out on the field.

That may be the finest prose in modern literature.


"If this trade dies, does it get resurrected in 3 days?" :thumbs_up:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 21, 2014, 01:12:56 PM
I'm crying laughing from that shit.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 01:40:13 PM
So, apparently there was language of repayment to the Broncos in the ballpark of $5M due to "bonus advancements" in the contract. Jets agree to the contract, but then read the contract.

I love you Jets. You so crazy.

So now, Rams/Jaguars in the mix to steal the deal because Jets legal department is a joke (much like the team).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 21, 2014, 01:48:14 PM
More news on this trade snag (http://espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/story/_/id/7718133/tim-tebow-trade-hits-snag-contract-language-source-says)

According to that, the trade isn't just a 4th round pick in 2012, but a 6th rounder as well. THE FUCK????? Two draft picks this year for a guy who shouldn't be your starter and might only be a change of pace/wildcat QB? And you didn't read the fucking contract? Please God, let this trade go through so the comedy gold doesn't stop.

Can't figure out why the Rams want in on him, but at least it isn't as crazy as the Jets getting him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 01:51:54 PM
The trade is Tebow + Broncos 2012 7th for Jets 2012 4th + 6th + $5M in cash.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 21, 2014, 02:51:08 PM
That's still a shitty trade.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 21, 2014, 03:06:03 PM
So, apparently there was language of repayment to the Broncos in the ballpark of $5M due to "bonus advancements" in the contract. Jets agree to the contract, but then read the contract.

I love you Jets. You so crazy.

So now, Rams/Jaguars in the mix to steal the deal because Jets legal department is a joke (much like the team).

Yeah, sounding like the trade won't be happening now.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on March 21, 2014, 03:28:07 PM
God, this shit is too much!  Too much!  Tebow just has to go to NY, I can't imagine the media explosion.  Stupid trade though.

Good on Roger to drop the hammer.  That bounty shit is disgusting.  I lost a lot of respect for Payton for this.  Only the refs should be allowed to illegally affect the outcome of games!  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on March 21, 2014, 03:54:05 PM
So even in the off season we have a Tebow incompletion.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 04:00:06 PM
Apparently NFL Network/Warren Sapp may have outted the Saints whistleblower. I say may have because the person is denying it, but obviously a dick move in either case.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/21/nfl-outs-suspected-saints-whistleblower-on-its-own-network/


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 21, 2014, 04:01:41 PM
Like hell it isn't Sapp's fault, article writer.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on March 21, 2014, 04:02:10 PM
I hope Sapp doesn't need his paycheck.  This looks really bad for the NFL to out the whistleblower on their own network.  Someone's going to take an arrow to the knee.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 04:03:15 PM
Like hell it isn't Sapp's fault, article writer.

Agreed.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on March 21, 2014, 04:25:39 PM
With the crazy amount of documents the NFL has about this, I'd be shocked (ha) if it was one person.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 21, 2014, 05:57:17 PM
Something like 10 hours later, Tebow to the Jets.

There was talk that the Broncos may have allowed Tebow to choose where he went. If that is true, nice move on their part.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on March 21, 2014, 07:35:38 PM
There are more heathen baby killers in NY/NJ for him to proselytize to than in Florida!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: taolurker on March 21, 2014, 08:22:48 PM
I was more thinking there's more chances for him to emulate Jesus with getting crucified by the NY media.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 21, 2014, 08:24:36 PM
The thing about that is that the NY Post is also relentlessly conservative. So it will be pretty hard for them to decide wtf to do about him, I imagine.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on March 21, 2014, 09:11:57 PM
The thing about that is that the NY Post is also relentlessly conservative. So it will be pretty hard for them to decide wtf to do about him, I imagine.

No it won't, they will put exactly the headline they think will sell the most copies, and it can change day to day for all they care.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on March 21, 2014, 10:01:53 PM
The Post will occassionally acknowledge the Jets exist, but it prefers to call for whoever is the current head coach for the Giants to get fired.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on March 22, 2014, 12:33:55 AM
I have no idea why, but SOMEONE hasn't posted this here yet.

http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/2012/03/a-savior-comes-to-new-york.html

Quote
Son, I don’t have faith in anything except the taste of a fine cigar and pertness of sixteen-year-old thighs. You two dimestore Rick Mirers are gonna have to duke it out on the field.

That may be the finest prose in modern literature.


Okay, that was fucking hysterical.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on March 22, 2014, 06:12:37 AM
The thing about that is that the NY Post is also relentlessly conservative. So it will be pretty hard for them to decide wtf to do about him, I imagine.

The post is relentlessly Tea Party/Wall-street conservative though isn't it? Rabid bible thumping anti-abortion ad running southern conservative is surely in the area they feel is safe to mock.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 22, 2014, 07:48:47 AM
The Post, like most Fox outlets, is for what sells the most. It occasionally lets a political bent into that, but don't for a minute think the Post won't run whatever salacious headline it can dream up to sell more papers, whether Tebow is an avowed social conservative or not.

I cannot wait for this training camp to begin. It's going to be fucking hilarious watching Sanchez's confidence shrivel as Rex Ryan is forced to start one of the few QB's who could legitimately be called worse than Sanchez. If the Jets don't make the playoffs (and I see no reason at the moment that they should), this team is going to fucking implode spectacularly. Santonio Holmes is likely to shoot somebody, maybe even on the field during a game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 22, 2014, 08:20:10 AM
http://www.businessinsider.com/tim-tebow-ny-post-ny-daily-news-2012-3



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on March 22, 2014, 08:25:32 AM
lol @ no ring circus


I have my issues with The Post but its headlines almost always amuse the fuck out of me. It's such a stupid rag. <3


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 22, 2014, 12:42:54 PM
Bears picked up Michael Bush for dirt cheap....like place kicker levels of cheap $14mil over 4 years. So Forte and Bush, both really good backs when healthy. So now, the Bears can be a strong offense when they're A) Healthy and B) their WRs are not in trouble with the law

Also, Andre Caldwell's fantasy stock just jumped as he signed with the Broncos. So now the Broncos have Denarius Thomas and Andre Caldwell - both have sub 4.4 40yd times along with Eric Decker. Now they just need a TE, I wonder if they'll try to pick up a TE in the draft (I believe Colby Teener was rated as the top TE).

Edit: Oh damn, I just saw Teener's pro-day results, 6'6 ~250lbs running at 4.4-4.5 40yd dash with a 37" vertical. He's faster and lighter than Gronkowski and almost equal to Jimmy Graham (Teener's lighter, Graham jumps about 1" higher, equal 40yd dash). I wonder if he'll now get taken higher than he was originally projected with a pro-day like this.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on March 22, 2014, 12:51:05 PM
Should've kept Tebow and made him the TE :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 22, 2014, 12:52:12 PM
That the Bears signed Michael Bush and still haven't given Forte an extension is just goddamn criminal. He's pissed off about it and he should be. Bush gets $7 million in guaranteed money, which is just slightly below Forte's entire 2012 salary under the franchise tag. You know, Bears, if you don't want him, just say so. I'd be happy as fuck to have him on the Packers.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 22, 2014, 12:52:55 PM
Tebow probably would have been alright for it if he would stop praying so his hands can be used to catch the damn ball  :why_so_serious:


And yeah, I'm not too happy for Forte since he should have had his contract already. He's already speaking out about it as he should be.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 22, 2014, 12:54:02 PM
I would not mind seeing Frote on the Broncos.  :oh_i_see:

Also, both Clark and Tamme will be visiting the Broncos, and could be a very good solution at TE, givne the Manningness of the team now. INDY WEST

And then minutes later... "Texans free agent tight end Joel Dreessen will choose between Broncos and Texans Friday morning." -- I would not be mad with this.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 23, 2014, 12:55:29 PM
So, a day after the Bears signed Michael Bush, Marion Barber retires.

Broncos add Joel Dressen, Jacob Tamme and Tracy Porter (whom I really hope is not included in bounty gate).

But.. Saturday goes to the Packers made me sad. :(


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 23, 2014, 12:58:20 PM
Saturday to the Packers is all kinds of :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on March 23, 2014, 01:11:19 PM
Saturday to the Packers is all kinds of :awesome_for_real:

Woah. Packers picked up a good I lineman in free agency? That is the opposite of what usually happens. Usually all their good ones leave.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on March 23, 2014, 01:12:29 PM
He's the first free agent of ANY kind they've signed in like 3 years. At least from outside their own team.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on March 23, 2014, 01:17:57 PM
And the NFL Network misses the god damn point....

Quote
Earlier on Friday, NFL Network addressed the recent on-air proclamation from analyst Warren Sapp that former Saints tight end Jeremy Shockey was the (in Sapp’s words) “snitch” regarding the Saints’ bounty program.  Specifically, NFLN Senior Vice President of Programming and Production Mark Quenzel said the league-owned network has “discussed it with Warren and stressed that he is an analyst and not a reporter for NFL Network.” (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/03/23/nfln-wont-fire-sapp-wont-comment-on-other-discipline/)


EDIT: "Jets trade Drew Stanton to the Colts." -- The circle is complete!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on March 25, 2012, 09:01:05 AM
 Specifically, NFLN Senior Vice President of Programming and Production Mark Quenzel said the league-owned network has “discussed it with Warren and stressed that he is an analyst and not a reporter for NFL Network.”[/url]

[/quote]

 :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 26, 2012, 08:55:30 AM
Paraphrasing a quote from Cowherd this morning on the radio:

Quote
Man the tension in Arizona is palpable. Those fans really wanted Kolb out of there. They like the team, they like the defense, they like the vision and the coaches. They hate their QB. They think he cares more about hunting and fishing than football, and they were gunning hard for Manning. Now that they didn't get him, this thing is going to get supremely awkward.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sauced on March 28, 2012, 09:02:41 AM
Rules changes:

- Overtime changed to match new Playoff format.  Both teams get a turn unless first team scores a touchdown.
- Turnovers join touchdowns as Automatic reviews.  Two extra tv time outs + 15 minutes per game.  Yay.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bungee on March 28, 2012, 09:11:20 AM
- Turnovers join touchdowns as Automatic reviews.  Two extra tv time outs + 15 minutes per game.  Yay.

Argh, like they didn't have enough commercials already. I guess this just means more watching the game in as-live with the gamepass package...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on March 28, 2012, 09:21:21 AM
Rules changes:

- Overtime changed to match new Playoff format.  Both teams get a turn unless first team scores a touchdown.
- Turnovers join touchdowns as Automatic reviews.  Two extra tv time outs + 15 minutes per game.  Yay.

I actually support the turnovers rule, but I think that it is poorly defined if it works this way.  If only turnovers that actually happen are reviewed that only solves part of the problem.  In much the same way the touchdown rule doesn't help the cases in which the guy was ruled out of bounds, this won't help things like an interception being ruled on the field an incomplete pass.

I know that coaches can still use their challenges in those situations, and that the rule means that they won't have to "waste" challenges in other situations which are now covered by the automatic rule, but I'd prefer if they worded it in such a way that covered all the scenarios.   Then again, I'm in support of them just going full on for what college football does and just having an off the field official that reviews every play as they are happening and buzzes down if he feels anything needs another look.  I've never felt like a college game was unduly delayed because of this, and it removes all the shenanigans.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 28, 2012, 09:50:30 AM
- Turnovers join touchdowns as Automatic reviews.  Two extra tv time outs + 15 minutes per game.  Yay.

Argh, like they didn't have enough commercials already. I guess this just means more watching the game in as-live with the gamepass package...

Yeah, I'm not happy about this. Fuck me, I support instant replay, but there are really way too many delays in the game because of it. I like the way rubgy does it. One official, off the field, is asked to review a play by the ref if it's something he didn't see clearly. And usually, it's only scoring plays. I think the gamesmanship involved with the current challenge system really kills the game flow.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on March 28, 2012, 10:10:44 AM
Why don't we just run the game on TV at 15 minutes behind the live game and review the whole damned thing?  I hate instant replay.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: caladein on March 28, 2012, 10:18:27 AM
Yes, I love competitions of world class athletes being decided by the faulty eye sight of old men, who are likely in such a terrible position that their eye sight is the least of their issues.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 28, 2012, 10:44:52 AM
I wouldn't mind all the commercials during NFL games if it wasn't the SAME GODDAM COMMERCIALS ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

Here's the John guy shilling bad pizza.
Here's the phone commerical with the flying footballs.
Here's the stupid Here-we-go campaign for beer.
Here's the commercial with a shitty truck talking about awards we never see.
Here's the credit card trying to pretend they aren't fucking you in the ass.
Here's the ad about shipping logistics
Here's the sportdrink that makes you awesome at sports
Here's the cola that won't make you fat

Rinse, repeat, over and over and over and over 15 more times a game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on March 28, 2012, 10:46:38 AM
I wouldn't mind all the commercials during NFL games if it wasn't the SAME GODDAM COMMERCIALS ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

Here's the John guy shilling bad pizza.
Here's the phone commerical with the flying footballs.
Here's the stupid Here-we-go campaign for beer.
Here's the commercial with a shitty truck talking about awards we never see.
Here's the credit card trying to pretend they aren't fucking you in the ass.
Here's the ad about shipping logistics
Here's the sportdrink that makes you awesome at sports
Here's the cola that won't make you fat

Rinse, repeat, over and over and over and over 15 more times a game.

Looks like success, you remember them all!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 28, 2012, 11:39:49 AM
Not a fan of the replay decision to keep the final decision up to the head ref, though I do like adding turnovers like scoring plays (though as Mala stated earlier it is an incomplete rule that should be expanded) and am still unsure why the horse-collar rule wasn't changed on QB.


In other news, Brandon Jacobs is a 49er now. that is a hell of a 1-2 punch for a running game adding to a couple of WRs and a TE that can even make Smith look good. The 49ers are looking scarier by the minute even without winning the Manning sweepstakes.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on March 28, 2012, 11:41:19 AM
I wouldn't mind all the commercials during NFL games if it wasn't the SAME GODDAM COMMERCIALS ALL THE FUCKING TIME.

Here's the John guy shilling bad pizza.
Here's the phone commerical with the flying footballs.
Here's the stupid Here-we-go campaign for beer.
Here's the commercial with a shitty truck talking about awards we never see.
Here's the credit card trying to pretend they aren't fucking you in the ass.
Here's the ad about shipping logistics
Here's the sportdrink that makes you awesome at sports
Here's the cola that won't make you fat

Rinse, repeat, over and over and over and over 15 more times a game.

You forgot about boner pills.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on March 28, 2012, 02:06:59 PM
To be fair, the Niners didn't really need Manning. He would have just been a significant upgrade to an already powerful team. I'm not sure Jacobs has a whole lot left in the tank as a starter, but 1) not playing on turf and 2) being a relief back for Frank Gore are both things that will significantly raise his usefulness.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 28, 2012, 02:24:42 PM
Looks like success, you remember them all!

Yeah, but the funny thing is I don't use any of those products. I drink Coke, don't drink beer anymore, use Sprint, drive a Lexus, I don't ship things, I drink Powerade, and I prefer local pizza.

Actually I do use VISA for debit cards. That's the only one.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 28, 2012, 02:29:14 PM
To be fair, the Niners didn't really need Manning. He would have just been a significant upgrade to an already powerful team. I'm not sure Jacobs has a whole lot left in the tank as a starter, but 1) not playing on turf and 2) being a relief back for Frank Gore are both things that will significantly raise his usefulness.

While I agere that they don't necessarily need Manning, they'd be even more so of a Bowl contender if he's playing well since Smith is really the weak link for their offense at this point (at least on days Moss feels like playing).

As for Jacobs, it really is more about upgrading their backfield package regardless of what down it is. If I'm a defense, and I already had to plan on Davis, Moss, Manningham, Crabtree, and Gore - then you add in Jacobs it's just another headache to practice for.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on March 28, 2012, 02:33:48 PM
Yeah, but the funny thing is I don't use any of those products. I drink Coke, don't drink beer anymore, use Sprint, drive a Lexus, I don't ship things, I drink Powerade, and I prefer local pizza.
You made anyone that reads your post think about Papa John's. I'd say that's more successful than if you picked up a phone and ordered a pizza yourself.

EDIT:Grammar are hard.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 28, 2012, 03:56:55 PM
I'm secretly a papa johns mole.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on March 28, 2012, 04:04:10 PM
Jesus Christ the Niners are loaded for this season!  Hope their Dream Team doesn't wind up like Philly's.  :awesome_for_real:

Also, I hate the extra commercial time.  Knock it off.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 28, 2012, 04:48:07 PM
NFL games will now take a minimum of four hours.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ginaz on March 28, 2012, 06:42:46 PM
I'm secretly a papa johns mole.

I like Papa John's. :eat:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on March 29, 2012, 08:25:49 AM
The games were going to take longer regardless with the new overtime rules.   

It is not clear to me is the turnover review rules only mean that a turnover might get reversed or whether an action on the field not ruled a turnover can be ruled a turnover in fact.  The second is more problematic than the first.  Most turnovers are pretty clear cut.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on March 29, 2012, 08:54:48 AM
The games were going to take longer regardless with the new overtime rules.   

It is not clear to me is the turnover review rules only mean that a turnover might get reversed or whether an action on the field not ruled a turnover can be ruled a turnover in fact.  The second is more problematic than the first.  Most turnovers are pretty clear cut.

Most fumbles are not clear cut in real time.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on March 29, 2012, 08:56:54 AM
The games were going to take longer regardless with the new overtime rules.   

It is not clear to me is the turnover review rules only mean that a turnover might get reversed or whether an action on the field not ruled a turnover can be ruled a turnover in fact.  The second is more problematic than the first.  Most turnovers are pretty clear cut.

The rule is the same as with touchdowns that only rulings that are called a touchdown (or in this case, a turnover) can be reversed. So the call on the field must be that the play resulted in a turnover for the booth review to come into effect.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on March 29, 2012, 11:43:04 AM
Ok, but most fumbles will be mechanically un-reviewable since they involve a ground scrum invisible to most camera angles.  I see this mostly playing out on strange interception/incomplete pass situations, but even then if the ball doesn't hit the ground, possession is the law.

I am trying to think of a play from this last season where a fumble turnover was not turnover.  The challenges I kind of remember involved a red flag leading to a non-turnover becoming a turnover.  Those will not be addressed by this rule.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on March 30, 2012, 04:48:28 AM
Ok, but most fumbles will be mechanically un-reviewable since they involve a ground scrum invisible to most camera angles.  I see this mostly playing out on strange interception/incomplete pass situations, but even then if the ball doesn't hit the ground, possession is the law.

I am trying to think of a play from this last season where a fumble turnover was not turnover.  The challenges I kind of remember involved a red flag leading to a non-turnover becoming a turnover.  Those will not be addressed by this rule.

This will mainly address fumbles where the guys knee is down prior to the ball coming out.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 03, 2012, 10:34:27 AM
The new jerseys are out. Seahawks the only one with a big redesign.

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d8280d110/article/nfl-nike-roll-out-new-uniforms-for-32-teams?module=HP11_cp


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on April 03, 2012, 11:35:05 AM
Whole lot of sleeve stripage there.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on April 03, 2012, 12:08:01 PM
I think the Browns uniforms are going to just be solid white tops and brown pants. They aren't even going to put names on the jerseys anymore because playing on this team is cruel and unusual punishment and shaming would just be overkill.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 03, 2012, 12:16:25 PM
Coincidentally the Raiders will just place the players Prison ID numbers on the back.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on April 03, 2012, 12:21:45 PM
Coincidentally the Raiders will just place the players Prison ID numbers on the back.

They called dibs on that over the Bengals?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on April 03, 2012, 12:25:49 PM
Maybe they'll just have to settle for listing their 40 time and benchpress numbers from the combine.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on April 03, 2012, 12:31:39 PM
As an aside, this is one of the finest quotes I have read in a comments section this year about my Browns and their draft potential:

Quote
They have 13 picks now. The way I see it, they could draft Jesus Christ and the 12 apostles and they will still suck.

 :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 04, 2012, 06:45:13 AM
Apparently Joe Flacco now thinks he's the best QB in the NFL (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7772584/joe-flacco-baltimore-ravens-says-think-best-qb-nfl).   :ye_gods:

I understand what you're saying, Joe, but there are other ways to get this point across without sounding like a total jackass. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on April 04, 2012, 06:51:23 AM
For Sjofn - Eli and his amazing beach body



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: El Gallo on April 04, 2012, 06:56:49 AM
Man I wish the Steelers would ditch the script numbers and go back to block ones.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on April 04, 2012, 08:05:06 AM
I hate this off season, I'm trying so hard to not be excited for the Bengals but I just can't do it. If they could get DeCastro and Kirkpatrick in round one I feel like they have a chance at making the playoffs again, which I know I shouldn't be thinking...  :ye_gods:

If they still had Jonathan Joseph... I hate drafting a CB at 17th or 21st feels like the potential for getting an average nickle guy at best is high with these prospects and knowing the Bengals they may take a flyer on Mister 4 kids with 3 women out of Northern Alabama. Fucking. Mike. Brown.

Anyone else feel like this is a really weak year for skill positions on offense as well? I think Blackmon is overhyped and the kid out of ND might even be better, there isn't a break out TE at all. There is one stud RB and pundits are trying to talk up RG3 as a sure thing (he isn't) and the kid from A&M like he's worthy of a top ten pick by Miami (worst pick ever if they make that call).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 04, 2012, 08:07:11 AM
Are you a Bengals fan?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 04, 2012, 08:43:22 AM
I don't think the Bengals actually have fans... I think they are mostly "Bengal Toleraters".


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 04, 2012, 08:58:21 AM
That's what I was thinking.  I know one guy that has season tickets and loves them, but that's a rarity outside of Cincinnati.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on April 04, 2012, 10:48:34 AM
For Sjofn - Eli and his amazing beach body


Ahem:

loooooooooool

EDIT: Also, not a big fan of the Cardinals uniform. It's too much red at once, it sort of makes them look like they're wearing old timey long johns to me.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Johny Cee on April 04, 2012, 12:54:36 PM
For Sjofn - Eli and his amazing beach body


Can't be Eli....  Eli would be wearing water wings, as I'm not sure he can swim.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 05, 2012, 07:54:24 AM
Saints are fucked.

Audio has emerged of Williams telling players to break Niners players AFTER they were warned by the league to knock it off. This will not help their appeal today.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/news;_ylt=At9UbKohK6AeAkVEI4YLxPI5nYcB?slug=ms-silver_gregg_williams_speech_saints_49ers_bounty_040412

https://twitter.com/#!/AdamSchefter/status/187892218302955521


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 05, 2012, 08:03:29 AM
The comments by Williams made me physically ill. That guy deserves to have his head kicked in.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 05, 2012, 08:13:32 AM
I'll give you $1000 to do it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 05, 2012, 08:22:31 AM
That guy is fucked, but I suspect he's being made a scapegoat for a much large problem in the NFL as a whole.  This is just the tip of the iceberg.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 05, 2012, 08:28:53 AM
He is getting in trouble because they got caught.

If you bust a guy for breaking into a car, he's not a scapegoat for guys that break into cars.... he's just the idiot that got caught.

And then the Saints were warned, and continued to do it. And then lied to Goodell.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 05, 2012, 08:36:16 AM
Goodell is making an example of the Saints though. And he should.

This kind of shit where you call out players by name and refer to their injuries so you can ruin them? You're a coach, for heaven's sake. You are supposed to be guiding force on a team of charged up players. It's "sweep the leg" type bullshit.

In any case, people don't try to "get their ducks in a row" or lie their asses off when asked questions if they believe they were doing something accepted and right.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on April 05, 2012, 09:25:58 AM
And then the Saints were warned, and continued to do it. And then lied to Goodell.

That's the crux of the matter -- while this goes on league wide (come on, what is the mindset of those excelling linebackers?, and only the dim James Harrisons of the league actually express it publicly), the Saints coaching staff chastened yet continued unrelenting in the behavior.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on April 05, 2012, 10:09:46 AM
The worst part is NY only got another ring because they used those exact tactics against the 49ers and that kid fucking gave them the game. At the same time I blame the coaching staff for not realizing he wasn't ok and taking him out before the final fumble.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 05, 2012, 10:50:09 AM
Goodell is making an example of the Saints though. And he should.

Obviously.  But people are fucking stupid if they don't think this is going on all over the league. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 05, 2012, 10:52:41 AM
Goodell is making an example of the Saints though. And he should.

Obviously.  But people are fucking stupid if they don't think this is going on all over the league. 

Institutionalized bounties run by the coaching staff? I don't believe that's going on at all. Bounty systems within the player ranks? That's a totally different story. The reason this gets hammered on is because the coaches were the ones running the show.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 05, 2012, 11:13:28 AM
 :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on April 05, 2012, 11:53:50 AM
I'd agree in that I imagine there are coaches that are running (or at least heavily supporting and probably throwing money into the pot) for bounty systems, but not "all over the league." Some? Sure, but far from the majority would be run by coaches directly. Also, I doubt the majority of those bounty systems have the intent of hurting, as opposed to making a solid and hard hit on someone (which is different by intent, though the result may be the same).

I must admit that I do like that Lamarr Woodley is questioning the line between bounties and contract incentives though (link here) (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d828116c8/article/woodley-believes-nfl-contracts-have-their-own-bounties?module=HP11_around-the-league) as that really is a pretty blurry line for most teams (N.O. being a bit different since they lied about a bounty program and theirs was set with the intent to injure players which is why I think they should be penalized, since I don't really think having a basic bounty system that has good intentions should even be considered an issue).

Quote
"If you think about it, when you say there's an extra incentive, the "bounty," that's like people having incentives in their contract," said Woodley, a five-year veteran with Pittsburgh. "You get a certain amount of sacks, you get an extra bonus. Is that considered a bounty?
 
"You're still going to go out there to make the plays in order to get some extra money. Is that putting that much more pressure to go out there and want to hit a quarterback because you know you have a $100,000 bonus coming if you do this?"



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on April 05, 2012, 11:57:56 AM
I'm sure you also get coaches saying 'take that guy out of the game' without offering a bounty, which I'm not sure you could ever do anything about, even though that's really the bad thing at the core of this, not the reward structure.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on April 05, 2012, 12:41:19 PM
I'm sure you also get coaches saying 'take that guy out of the game' without offering a bounty, which I'm not sure you could ever do anything about, even though that's really the bad thing at the core of this, not the reward structure.

I think with regards to the audio people are a bit shocked by how explicit it is.  Hit the guy with the recent concussion in the head, take out the ACL of their receiver, etc.

We can all sort of justify "All right men, lets go out their and fuck them up!" or "Let's hit him so hard he can't get up!"  But the specific nature of how they want to injure guys is going beyond anything most of us thought they were doing in the worst case.  Even something general like "$1000 bucks for knocking a guy out of the game" seems less egregious than this audio.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on April 05, 2012, 12:46:41 PM
I heard a bit of that audio at lunch.  :ye_gods: Gregg Williams is LE FUCKED. There is no excuse for that shit. He specifically says to test out dude's ACL. That's fucking insane. ACL's are generally 6 week to full seasons lost. Some guys never recover their mojo after an ACL. You're talking about fucking with someone's career there.

Fuck Gregg Williams in the earhole.

Do I think there are bounties league wide? Sure. This goes way beyond that and the audio drives that home. The craziest part is that he KNEW there was a guy FILMING AND RECORDING IN THE SAME FUCKING ROOM. Are you mentally deficient?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 05, 2012, 02:51:17 PM
Some levity: http://www.theonion.com/articles/ryan-leaf-somehow-worse-at-crime-than-football,27861/


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on April 18, 2012, 07:14:48 AM
NFL schedule is posted (http://www.nfl.com/schedules/2012/REG1).
Thanksgiving should be pretty awesome this year with Hou @ Det, WAS @ Dal, NE @ NYJ. It's sad when NE @ NYJ may be more boring than WAS @ Dal, but that all depends on how G3 does this season imo.

Overall, I like this schedule


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on April 18, 2012, 07:17:46 AM
http://www.nfl.com/schedules/2012/REG/BROWNS

Looks like Barkley will be in the orange and brown in 2013.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on April 18, 2012, 07:21:46 AM
Week 11 and 13 matchup between Ravens and Steelers is a bit :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on April 18, 2012, 07:48:19 AM
Eagles have 4 games against teams coming off BYE.  I have no idea if this actually has meaning, but some sports blogs are focusing on it. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 18, 2012, 07:49:05 AM
Here's my feelings on the Cowboys schedule. It's brutal. Outside the division we draw Chicago, Seattle, Baltimore, Carolina, TB, Atlanta, Cleveland, Cincy, Pitt, and New Orleans. Five of those teams went to the playoffs last year, Washington will have RG3, Carolina has Cam, TB went out and got 5 big FA signings, and Seattle is IN Seattle which is never easy. Plus our bye week is Week 5, which means that we get no advantage from it.

Atlanta's schedule isn't much easier. They have to deal with the Giants, Cowboys, Broncos, Chargers (on the road), Eagles, and Lions. That's a tough road as well.

I think Houston has one of the most favorable schedules this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on April 18, 2012, 08:00:15 AM
Week 11 and 13 matchup between Ravens and Steelers is a bit :uhrr:


There are a couple more situations like that this year, and PFT did a good analysis on these situations (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/17/three-division-rivals-play-twice-in-three-games/) showing 3 different divisional rivalries that play twice within three weeks time. Ravens-Steelers, Bears-Vikings, and Colts-Texans.

The Ravens vs Steelers is the one rivalry that I am interested in seeing them be close together. Personally, I'd absolutely love it if it was Ravens vs Steelers twice in three weeks with only a bye week inbetween the games. That is one of the best rivalries in the NFL that I could watch week in and week out if it was available.

On another note - take a look at the Sunday night games, that schedule is loaded with awesome this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on April 18, 2012, 10:18:07 AM
Broncos are not coming to NY this season.  That would have been interesting.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on April 18, 2012, 02:39:32 PM
I am indifferent to this season because none of it means anything, the Giants never, ever repeat and I see no reason to think they will this time.  :why_so_serious:  As long as they beat the Eagles and the Cowboys at least once (bonus if it fucks those teams over somehow), I will consider the season a win.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 18, 2012, 03:18:36 PM
We still have Romo and Jerry Jones as the GM.

We can fuck ourselves over, thank you very much.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on April 18, 2012, 03:42:37 PM
It's more fun when the Giants do it, though.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on April 18, 2012, 04:23:02 PM
No fucking idea how Packers and Patriots get easy schedules. Annoying.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 18, 2012, 04:28:36 PM
No fucking idea how Packers and Patriots get easy schedules. Annoying.


Two best, most marketable QBs in the league? Yeah wonder why the NFL would want THOSE GUYS in the playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on April 18, 2012, 04:36:00 PM
Mostly because of the divisional stuff. Not only are the AFC East and NFC North pretty weak divisions, its those divisions turns to play the even weaker divisions in the NFC West and AFC South. (Do they do it by turns? I am just making an assumption there.)

Although thinking about this it seems like it should mean the 49ers also have an easy schedule and that isn't the case.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on April 18, 2012, 04:38:08 PM
Yes it's on a rotating basis: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_rivalries#Background


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on April 18, 2012, 04:48:25 PM
Giants first four games are odd.

Game 1 Wednesday
Wait 11 Days then...
Game 2 Sunday
Wait 4 Days then...
Game 3 Thursday
Wait 10 Days then...

G'damn.

Are sched is brutal though for the whole NFC East for that matter.  We play the AFC North and NFC South.

That means the NFC East plays the Saints, Falcons, Steelers, Bengals and Ravens, all playoff teams, then you also have to play an emerging Carolina team.  That's the same for the Cowboys, Eagles, Giants and Skins.

Now The Giants have to face the first place team in the NFC West and North which is the 49ers and Packers.  All told, that's 7 playoff teams, 4 of them on the road.






Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on April 18, 2012, 06:32:29 PM
Mostly because of the divisional stuff. Not only are the AFC East and NFC North pretty weak divisions

Having one weak team in the NFC North doesn't make it a weak division.

For scheduling - iirc, yes, the scheduling is you play each of the other three teams in your division twice, play the four teams from another division in the same conference, then the four teams from one of the opposite conference's divisions, and then something with the rankings from the previous season to determine the previous two years. The divisions you play rotate every so often to make sure teams play each other so many times in so many years

Edit: Wikipedia explains it much better (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Football_League_regular_season#Formula)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 18, 2012, 06:55:31 PM
Mostly because of the divisional stuff. Not only are the AFC East and NFC North pretty weak divisions, its those divisions turns to play the even weaker divisions in the NFC West and AFC South.

Wait, wait, the NFC North is a weak division? Are you kidding me? Not only did they have the team with the best overall record AND a wild card slot, they also had the most wins of any division in the NFC. Hell, by almost any viewpoint I'd say they are probably the second strongest division in the NFL behind the NFC South going into 2012.

As for the AFC, I don't think they have a "strong" division other than the AFC North. The rest are just teams that are missing one or two pieces to make a playoff run (with the exception of Denver if Manning is 85% or better of what he was)



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: caladein on April 18, 2012, 07:05:21 PM
Giants first four games are odd.

Yeah, the weird part is that you've got the Thursday game so close to your automatic mid-week first game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on April 19, 2012, 08:35:47 AM
Mostly because of the divisional stuff. Not only are the AFC East and NFC North pretty weak divisions

Yeah, that's not right. The AFC East isn't a creampuff division, though it's certainly weaker than the AFC North or NFC North. The NFC North, however, is absolutely not a weak division. You have to think Chicago got BETTER with Brandon Marshall, a returning Cutler, an offensive coordinator who doesn't try to get his QB killed by not blocking for him and making 7-step drops his version of the quick pass. The Lions will be at least as good as last year if not better. The Packers may lose more games this year - but I still expect an 11 to 13 win season. The Vikings will be a pushover, that much is true.

I don't see Green Bay's schedule being all that easy. Ok, they get Indy and Jacksonville. I don't expect St. Louis or Tennessee to be a pushover, they have to play AT Seattle on a Monday night then play a Sunday afternoon game against New Orleans, and they have to play AT New York. Best news for them is playing Minnesota twice in the last 5 weeks of the season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 19, 2012, 09:40:38 AM
ESPN Has a nice SoS ranking.

http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/56896/2012-nfl-strength-of-schedule

Manning isn't getting any favors with his first season as the Broncos QB. Mind you, as a fan, I'm pleased with _5_ primetime games, including three before the Bye.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on April 19, 2012, 10:08:41 AM
FIrst thing that hits me from that SoS ranking link is that I feel really bad for the Browns....wow. 7 games against playoff teams, 6 of those are divisional games. Their only "breaks" will be against the Colts w/ Andrew Luck, and a much improved Redskins with Griffin and a couple new receivers.

3-13 may be an ambitious goal for them this season. Though, they did do well vs divisional opponents last year, and have made some good moves on the defensive side of the ball in free agency, I just don't think they'll be able to pull out more than 1-2 divisional wins this year with their even worse offense when compared to last year's (I didn't think it was possible....but they proved me wrong....gg Cle).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on April 19, 2012, 10:16:38 AM
FIrst thing that hits me from that SoS ranking link is that I feel really bad for the Browns....wow. 7 games against playoff teams, 6 of those are divisional games. Their only "breaks" will be against the Colts w/ Andrew Luck, and a much improved Redskins with Griffin and a couple new receivers.

3-13 may be an ambitious goal for them this season. Though, they did do well vs divisional opponents last year, and have made some good moves on the defensive side of the ball in free agency, I just don't think they'll be able to pull out more than 1-2 divisional wins this year with their even worse offense when compared to last year's (I didn't think it was possible....but they proved me wrong....gg Cle).

3-13. That sounds about right. I think they get by the Bills, Indy and NYG (yes, I said it - this is what the Browns do to fuck with their fans).

HOWEVER, the Browns have never in their history (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/teams/cle/) gone 5 consecutive years with a losing record. Of course, that is always subject to change, but still.

In other news...
http://www.steelers.com/video-and-audio/photo-gallery/80th-Season-Throwback-Uniform---4-17/ad65d41e-3b56-4fd7-ae4a-f19aa1132d75
 :uhrr:

edit: Ugh. Eating and typing, not gud.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on April 19, 2012, 11:49:54 AM
Not only are the AFC East and NFC North pretty weak divisions

The NFC North is probably the toughest division in the NFC over the past few seasons, either that or the East. The AFC east I'll give you as a weak-ish division. For a good portion of the last season both the NFC wildcard spots were coming from the NFC North, and in the previous three seasons you have had a team from the NFC North taking at least one of the NFC wildcard spots. It's not the be-all-end-all measure, but I think calling it a weak division is a bit of a stretch. That said, who knows where we are heading with this season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on April 19, 2012, 12:22:24 PM

In other news...
http://www.steelers.com/video-and-audio/photo-gallery/80th-Season-Throwback-Uniform---4-17/ad65d41e-3b56-4fd7-ae4a-f19aa1132d75
 :uhrr:

edit: Ugh. Eating and typing, not gud.

I saw those uniforms earlier but didn't want to subject others to have that image burned in their eyes. Those uniforms are just not right....not right at all.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 19, 2012, 02:09:25 PM
I like the effect of the numbers just being taped to the uniforms.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 23, 2012, 12:58:55 PM
Speaking of things being taped...


Quote
NEW ORLEANS -- The U.S. Attorney's Office in the Eastern District of Louisiana was told Friday that New Orleans Saints general manager Mickey Loomis had an electronic device in his Superdome suite that had been secretly re-wired to enable him to eavesdrop on visiting coaching staffs for nearly three NFL seasons, "Outside the Lines" has learned.
 (http://espn.go.com/espn/otl/story/_/id/7846290/new-orleans-saints-mickey-loomis-eavesdrop-opposing-coaches-home-games)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on April 23, 2012, 01:08:49 PM
 :ye_gods:

Oh they are FUCKED.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on April 23, 2012, 01:22:29 PM
They always use the first team caught as the example.  Lesson learned: don't get caught!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 23, 2012, 01:26:59 PM
They wouldn't be the first team caught spying.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on April 23, 2012, 02:01:25 PM
They wouldn't be the first team caught spying.

Belichick wasn't the first either.  People have pretty short-term memories when it comes to this stuff.  You have to slap a hand every season or two so that teams do a better job of concealing this stuff from the media/public.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 23, 2012, 04:35:54 PM
Good news is the statute of limitations already ran out on the wiretapping violation.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on April 23, 2012, 04:48:06 PM
Mostly, but not entirely if I read that article correctly, specifically this part:
Quote
"There's the potential for a lot of lawsuits filed by whoever was victimized by the electronic eavesdropping," Emmick said.

Under the civil laws that govern electronic eavesdropping, the victims of the eavesdropping would have two years from the time they had a "reasonable opportunity to discover the violation" in order to file lawsuits, Emmick said.

While, if I'm understanding this correctly, they dodged a much MUCH larger bullet from Federal prosecution, but still may be sued by visiting teams if an investigation. I may be wrong, but that's what it seems like to me.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: caladein on April 23, 2012, 05:24:46 PM
Yeah, the federal and state criminal statues of limitation are five and six years respectively.  The civil liability clock starts now from what was said on ESPN earlier. (IANAL and such.)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on April 24, 2012, 08:50:00 AM
Jets to use Tebow as a personal protector on punts (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1157827-tim-tebow-told-he-will-help-out-on-punts-no-seriously)

Not. Enough.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 24, 2012, 09:03:19 AM
I don't put much stock in that. Pretty much anything you hear from now until the draft is over turns out to be total crap. If we hear it again in two weeks? Then, yeah.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on April 24, 2012, 09:18:11 AM
Dear God, why did they have to trade Tebow to the biggest fucking media market circus in the goddamn world?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on April 24, 2012, 09:25:57 AM
Old news is old news (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/02/tim-tebow-may-have-a-role-on-jets-special-teams/). Has Tebowmania gone so far they're going to re-state old shit just to keep his name on a headline? I think the bigger story of the day for a second string baddie would be that NFL Films (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/thehuddle/post/2012/04/nfl-films-rates-tim-tebow-ahead-of-earl-campbell-marcus-allen/1) actually rates Mark Sanchez's back up QB as the #7 best Heismann Trophy winner in the NFL...what the fuck?

They place him over Eddie George, Bo Jackson, Reggie Bush*, Rashaan Salaam, Tony Dorsett, Marcus Allen, Tony Campbell, Herschell Walker, Cam Newton (who probably shouldn't be on that list at all after only one season, even as amazing of a season as it was it just isn't a large enough sample size to put him on that list yet imo) and a whole slew of other players who were, you know, actually good at a pro level consistently for years.

Edit: Looks like of the 2400+ votes for whether he should be on that list, higher, or lower currently has 8% thinking he should be higher, 8% thinking #7 is about right, 10% think he should be lower, and 75% voting that "it's absurd he's on the list."


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on April 24, 2012, 09:45:13 AM
Heh, indeed.  :grin:

(http://i.imgur.com/0lQ7d.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 24, 2012, 10:40:38 AM
 :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 24, 2012, 11:00:12 AM
Old news is old news (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/04/02/tim-tebow-may-have-a-role-on-jets-special-teams/).

None of that was news, it was speculation at the time, to be perfectly fair. I will never tire of Tebow craziness now that it has nothing to do with the Broncos... well, until they play the Jets in the AFC Championship game.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on April 24, 2012, 12:37:12 PM
Yes, in fairness it was speculation at the time. Though, it was speculation based on the Jets wanting to use Tebow in various situations, and punt plays isn't exactly a shocking surprise as one of the results

More news on the NFL Films list of bullshit though - they posted the criteria (http://nflfilms.nfl.com/2012/04/24/producers-respond-to-tim-tebow-top-10-outrage/) for that list (since, for some reason, more than a player's stats/career are being taken into account), and it only gets more face-palmy from here. The criteria is:

Quote
Who had the best NFL career?
Who had signature plays and great moments?
Who had box-office appeal? Who sells tickets? Who sells jerseys?
Who has cultural resonance? Who passes the Mom test?
Their reasoning? "The Heisman Trophy isn’t always about who’s the best player. Just ask Larry Fitzgerald and Eli Manning about losing out to Jason White."  :facepalm:

The best part - if passing the mom test is a criterai - how is OJ Simpson on there?

the draft can't come soon enough so there's something better to talk about regarding the NFL


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 24, 2012, 12:42:09 PM
The Heisman isn't about the best player. It's about the best player on the best team with the best exposure.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on April 24, 2012, 02:46:51 PM
The Heisman isn't about the best player. It's about the best player on the best team with the best exposure.

Don't forget offensive skill positions only!

It is kind of a dumb award.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 24, 2012, 02:54:34 PM
I've always thought of the Heisman as sort of an MVP-for-college type award.  That doesn't make it a bad award.  I think that whoever gets it usually deserves it.  It has nothing to do with who is going to eventually have the best pro career, nor should it. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 24, 2012, 04:27:36 PM
I disagree. I think it's a bad award.

Not only does it totally miss the point of football, which is the ultimate TEAM sport, but it also actively weeds out anybody who isn't a quarterback or runningback at this point. Never mind the fact it's a political circle jerk run by a bunch of assholes.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on April 24, 2012, 04:31:37 PM
I've always thought of the Heisman as sort of an MVP-for-college type award.  That doesn't make it a bad award.  I think that whoever gets it usually deserves it.  It has nothing to do with who is going to eventually have the best pro career, nor should it. 

If they're going to call it the award for the best college player, only ever giving it to QBs and RBs is a joke, is the main thing for me.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 24, 2012, 09:30:42 PM
You've just described basically every award given, Paelos.  They are going to be subjective political circle jerks.  As for the concern with only QBs or RBs, who cares?  There are awards for the best lineman. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on April 25, 2012, 04:25:54 AM
 :roll:

Can you name these prestigious awards that lineman get without using google/Wikipedia ?

The Heisman is a joke. But it is one that is foisted off as being this symbol of greatness that it really isn't.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 05:13:31 AM
You guys are being entirely too righteous.  The award is fine.  There are plenty of other things that should be the focus of the f13 sports ire.  This really isn't one of them.

Edited to add-  one award is the Outland award, I believe give to the best O lineman. And no, I didn't Google it


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Merusk on April 25, 2012, 05:19:45 AM
There's enough hate in our hearts for both.

Now ask 5 of your patients today what the Outland award in football is and then what the Heisman is.   For randomness, let's say the 9:30, 11:00, 2:30, 3:30 and 5:00 appointments.  That will illustrate the 'prestige' of one vs the other.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 06:25:49 AM
I think you are all being ridiculous.  I love the Heisman, as is. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 25, 2012, 06:52:43 AM
I think you are all being ridiculous.  I love the Heisman, as is. 

I think you dodged the question, because you know that nobody knows any of the other awards in college football. The only one I know off the top of my head is the Ray Guy for punting because Georgia has won it so many times.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on April 25, 2012, 07:30:49 AM
Awards don't mean shit if you cannot deliver in the pros.  What percent of Heisman winners went to the Hall of Fame?  Just a wild guess it is less than 20%.  One of them used to be a salesman at my firm 3 jobs ago.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 07:33:39 AM
No, I didn't dodge the question.  The Heisman is what the Heisman is.  It's not any different than the MVP in any other sport.  It's heavily biased towards offense and position, as are all the other MVPs.  Do you know when the last time an interior lineman won the NFL MVP?  Never!  You've had a defensive tackle, a placekicker and a linebacker.  The rest are quarterbacks (90%) and running backs (10%).  What about the MLB MVP?  It's heavily biased against pitchers, although I think everyone is aware that the best pitcher on the best team should routinely be considered for the award.  And (in a shocker, I know) the award is heavily biased toward the best offensive player, who usually is an OF, 1B or 3B player.  The NBA MVP is probably the most varied in who it is given to, but it is almost invariably given to one of the top scorers in the league on one of the better teams.  Steve Nash was an anomaly, a winner that got the award for his assists and scoring, but he certainly didn't get it because of his defense.  NHL MVP is focused clearly on offense.  Almost exclusively it's a center or an offensive player with a goalie peppered in every now and again.  

I'm sure there's general gnashing of teeth about how all these awards are so biased, but it's really just blathering about nothing.  Do you know why nobody knows who the winner of the John Mackey award or the Rimington Trophy is?  Because they don't care.  Offense steals the show and you'll just have to learn to sleep at night with that understanding.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 25, 2012, 07:41:15 AM
I think there's some overreacting going on here, but I don't think it's the people that think the Heisman sucks.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 07:57:02 AM
I think there's some overreacting going on here, but I don't think it's the people that think the Heisman sucks.

That is a highly intelligent retort.  It's full of information.   :grin:

Troll on. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 25, 2012, 08:08:07 AM
People say "Hey, Heisman is kind of a joke" and your reaction makes it seem like there will be RIOTS IN THE STREETS.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 08:10:15 AM
People say "Hey, Heisman is kind of a joke" and your reaction makes it seem like there will be RIOTS IN THE STREETS.

Providing real comparisons of other biased awards that people don't bitch about is making it "seem like there will be RIOTS IN THE STREETS"?  Interesting.  Also, I would reference Chimpy and Merusk, who have their own pitchforks and torches out. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 25, 2012, 08:15:30 AM
The problem is with that assumption. It's dangerously close to being a strawman argument. Most people that would complain about the Heisman issue would also complain about those other awards.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 08:17:16 AM
I don't hear it. 

But even if they do the point remains that it's a silly thing to bitch about.  Usually the MVP of these leagues and the Heisman winner is one of the very, very top players in their sport.  There's a media and fan bias towards offense.  Woopty shit.  That's life. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sir T on April 25, 2012, 08:32:10 AM
(http://a.espncdn.com/combiner/i?img=/photo/2012/0423/grant_g_obama1_sl_640.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 25, 2012, 08:39:04 AM
Usually the MVP of these leagues and the Heisman winner is one of the very, very top players in their sport.

To be a top player in your sport you have to do it at the highest level. The Heisman is bullshit for that fact. They pick guys who aren't the best. They are the most popular.

The last Heisman winner to be an NFL hall of famer was Barry Sanders in 1988. Since 1935, only 8 Heisman winners are in the NFL Hall. Let me give you a list since 1990.

Ty Detmer, Desmond Howard, Gino Torretta, Charlie Ward, Rashaan Salam, Eddie George, Danny Wuerffel, Charles Woodson, Ricky Williams, Ron Dayne, Chris Weinke, Eric Crouch, Carson Palmer, Jason White, Matt Leinart, <VACATED>, Troy Smith, Tim Tebow, Sam Bradford, Mark Ingram, Cam Newton, RG3.

You know how many of those guys are probowlers? Six.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on April 25, 2012, 08:41:08 AM
There is no doubt it is a good career move to win the Heisman.  I don;t think anyone disagrees with that.   It just has very little predictive value about professional success.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 25, 2012, 08:44:16 AM
My point is guys like Ndamukong Suh, Maurkice Pouncey, and Jason Pierre-Paul don't win the Heisman. They just go to pro-bowls and win playoff games in the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 08:55:27 AM
The Heisman is not an award designed to pick the best future NFL player.  It is for the most outstanding player in college football, not the best or the most talented or the best potential future, the most outstanding.  That is clearly centered around college football, not the NFL.  Interpret how that player should have impacted his team as you will, but there is no doubt that you shouldn't be considering their NFL potential.  

The NFL is also full of guys that were drafted after the third round that become stars.  Should these guys have been picked for the Heisman simply because they were in the Pro Bowl?  The possibility makes no sense.

Also, Paelos, look at the number of guys on your list that were very successful at the college level, often leading their team to the national title.  That's why it's a college award and not given at the end of their career when we can see how successful they were in the pros.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 25, 2012, 10:31:35 AM
The Heisman is not an award designed to pick the best future NFL player.  It is for the most outstanding player in college football

It doesn't even do that right. In most cases it just picks the best QB or RB on the national championship team. That didn't work this year when both National championship contenders were known for DEFENSE of course. Gino Torretta wins over Marshall Faulk? Eric Crouch was better than Rex Grossman? What about Jason White being better than Larry Fitzgerald? Reggie Bush over Vince Young? Matt Leinart was better than Adrian Peterson?

In every way, shape, and form, the award puts too much emphasis on your team winning a large bowl game rather than the most outstanding player. If you want to call it that, follow through on it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 10:34:50 AM
Shouldn't the definition of most outstanding player probably include being successful at winning games, particularly the big games?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 25, 2012, 10:36:35 AM
Shouldn't the definition of most outstanding player probably include being successful at winning games, particularly the big games?

No. The most outstanding player should be the best statistical player of the year, regardless of position and the rest of your team's wins or loses.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 10:53:49 AM
That's your opinion, which is apparently not shared by anyone that chooses or was involved in founding the Heisman (or really any other major sporting award). 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 25, 2012, 11:19:56 AM
That's your opinion, which is apparently not shared by anyone that chooses or was involved in founding the Heisman (or really any other major sporting award). 

Bullshit. Cy Young, Silver Slugger, Triple Crown, Naismith, Vardon Trophy, Hart Trophy, etc.

Only football really fucks this up by going LOL QB THAT WINZ! and handing the trophy to him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 11:38:01 AM
The only ones of those that are pure stats are the pure stat baseball ones.  The others are not and have a lot of subjective factors injected into the decision.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 25, 2012, 11:55:45 AM
The only ones of those that are pure stats are the pure stat baseball ones.  The others are not and have a lot of subjective factors injected into the decision.

I can see you're going to be obtuse. There are subjective factors, but they still judge those subjective factors better than HE'S ON TEH WINNING TEAM!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 12:01:57 PM
Robert Griffin III wasn't on the winning team.  

The Heisman Trust's Mission:  

Quote
The Heisman Memorial Trophy annually recognizes the outstanding college football player whose performance best exhibits the pursuit of excellence with integrity. Winners epitomize great ability combined with diligence, perseverance, and hard work.

It's also well known that winning is a part of their formula, even though they clearly don't always choose the "winner".  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bungee on April 25, 2012, 12:10:09 PM
Quote
I do love watching Tebow play, he combines all the fiery leadership of Ray Lewis with the throwing ability of Ray Lewis

 :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: caladein on April 25, 2012, 12:18:55 PM
"Most outstanding" is not a vaguely nebulous term like "most valuable" is.  It's for the best player.  The Heisman does a pretty terrible job at fulfilling its mandate of honoring the best player that lacks severe integrity issues.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 25, 2012, 12:20:08 PM
Robert Griffin III wasn't on the winning team.  

Bad example. It's not about winning the championship, it's about the potential to win the championship. So very very often they pick the guy they think will win it all, and are dead wrong. It's laughable. The reason they went with Griffin last year was because they had no other choice. The two teams playing were both SEC teams that specialized in defense! The HORROR! At least they tossed Mathieu a bone by letting him come to NY.

Cam Newton - QB for the champion
Mark Ingram - RB for the champion
Sam Bradford - Runner up in the championship game (they couldn't vote for Timmy T twice)
Tebow - They got this one right, he was statistically so much better than anybody else it wasn't funny
Troy Smith - losing QB in the champ game (voters HATED Chris Leak)
Bush and Leinart - duh
Jason White - lost in the title game to an LSU team that had Dwayne Bowe and Joseph Addai.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 12:45:06 PM
Well, I think it is clear that we will have to agree to disagree, Paelos.  And you are wrong.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 25, 2012, 12:51:50 PM
 :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on April 25, 2012, 12:52:34 PM
It just seems self-evident to me that there are years when the actual "most outstanding" player in football is going to be a defensive player.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 12:55:04 PM
Yes, very much so.  In fact, I would say that Nick Fairly was as much a reason that Auburn won the national title as Cam Newton and should have been in the running for the big awards.  But that isn't how the Heisman works.  It has never worked that way and never will. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 25, 2012, 01:05:59 PM
Yes, very much so.  In fact, I would say that Nick Fairly was as much a reason that Auburn won the national title as Cam Newton and should have been in the running for the big awards.  But that isn't how the Heisman works.  It has never worked that way and never will. 

Then, by even your own standards, that makes it a BAD AWARD


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 25, 2012, 01:07:56 PM
No, it's just fine.  Because clearly Cam Newton deserved the award that year.  Fairly could have gotten it as well, but Newton was the best choice. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 26, 2012, 07:42:57 AM
Hmm.  The NFL is moving forward to get rid of the Pro Bowl (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7857508/nfl-moving-suspend-pro-bowl-sources-say).  I think that's a great idea.  I wish they would do away with all the All Star games.  I can't think of anything less interesting. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on April 26, 2012, 07:51:59 AM
I've never been a big fan of the Pro Bowl but I do enjoy the NHL All Star Weekend, specifically the skills competition.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on April 26, 2012, 07:52:22 AM
I'm all for ditching the Pro Bowl. I haven't given two shits about the actual game since I was a teenager. It's just a boring game to watch.

I'm stoked for the draft tonight. Got the Tivo set so I can fast forward through the between round blather and turn a 3-hour event into the 15 minutes of interest it will actually be.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 26, 2012, 07:53:40 AM
Fuck yes.  I forgot that tonight was the draft. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on April 26, 2012, 01:19:57 PM
I've never been a big fan of the Pro Bowl but I do enjoy the NHL All Star Weekend, specifically the skills competition.

I loved those old QB challenge things they use to do back in the day. Throw to a moving target on a golf cart, how many throws you could make in a set amount of time, etc. Only problem, it was only the QBs partaking in it.

That said... fuck the probowl. It was better after the season was over, but only because it was that one more game to watch even though it was a fucking horrible one to look at.

As for the draft... can't wait to see who's career the Browns fuck up next.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on April 26, 2012, 01:23:09 PM
I like the baseball All-Star game, and the NHL skills thing is pretty fun. Otherwise I can pretty much take or leave them.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 26, 2012, 01:23:55 PM
Yeah, seeing the best pitchers go for an inning or two is always awesome. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on April 26, 2012, 05:01:21 PM
And so it begins...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 26, 2012, 05:36:02 PM
3 trades in the first 6 picks. Love the drama with the new rookie payscale. The hold up on the announcement is now firmly in the hands of the commisioner as he takes photos with each player. 6 picks in under 30 minutes.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on April 27, 2012, 06:38:54 AM
Seems like a pretty reasonable first round.  I guess people are saying Seattle reached, but if it was , it was a pretty uninteresting reach.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on April 27, 2012, 06:53:23 AM
The Browns taking Weeden just killed me. Well at least they won't ruin a good QB, because, well...Cleveland.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on April 27, 2012, 07:47:52 AM
I'll wait until the draft is over to whine, but was a bit annoyed at the Broncos straight up trading out of the first round... but I guess with the top level DTs gone, there wasn't a lot to gun for that they wanted.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on April 27, 2012, 08:35:11 AM
The rookie wage scale change has made the draft super-interesting to watch now. It was actually interesting to watch - though I Tivoed it and zipped through all the dead time between picks. All those trades... awesome. I love that my Packers got a DE/OLB with their pick, though I was hoping they'd get the kid from Boise State that Chicago ended up picking. I think Seattle really screwed the pooch with that pick, but then Carroll's never been shy about picking up "questionable" characters in the past. Dallas trading up to get Claiborne might actually be the steal of the draft. It absolutely filled a HUGE need for them.

Poor Cleveland. You got the guy you were probably going to get anyway, but fuck's sake did you give up a SHITLOAD for it. 4 picks? He better be damn good. Whedon couldn't even hide his disappointment at being shipped off to the factory of sadness. I think with a run game, Colt McCoy will be a decent QB if they keep him and they absolutely should keep him (there's talk of trading him now) so long as Richardson works out in the running game. Minnesota did VERY well, getting all those picks, getting the guy they wanted anyway AND getting back into the first round to get the best safety available at the time. Tampa did good as well getting both Barron and the running back Martin. The Jags might have overpaid to get Blackmon, but holy shit, they need somebody that can catch the ball.

Defense really ruled this draft, especially pass rushers. Sure Luck and RG3 got the headlines, but once the marquee guys came off the board, it was defense, defense, defense except where a team needed an O-lineman really badly.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on April 27, 2012, 10:17:04 AM
I think New England had a pretty good first round.  They've got two more picks in round two as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bungee on April 27, 2012, 10:32:46 AM
I think New England had a pretty good first round.  They've got two more picks in round two as well.

Which will be all they have left in this draft. I still don't get how DeCastro fell to the Steelers. How often can you satisfy both need and best player available at #24 in the first round?!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on April 27, 2012, 10:37:03 AM
I think New England had a pretty good first round.  They've got two more picks in round two as well.

Which will be all they have left in this draft.

True, but 4 picks in the first two rounds isn't too bad.  Although they are known for getting value you late in the draft.  To me it points to the fact that they see the clock ticking on Brady and want to pick high and put some pieces in that they don't have to develop much.  They want to take a couple more runs at this thing before he is done.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on April 27, 2012, 10:39:50 AM
Carroll's never been shy about picking up "questionable" characters in the past.

I really don't get how he is questionable. Seems like his is a feel good story or am I missing something? (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nfl--west-virginia-prospect-bruce-irvin-ditches-burglary--drug-game-for-shot-at-nfl.html)



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on April 27, 2012, 10:47:15 AM
The rookie wage scale change has made the draft super-interesting to watch now. It was actually interesting to watch - though I Tivoed it and zipped through all the dead time between picks. All those trades... awesome. I love that my Packers got a DE/OLB with their pick, though I was hoping they'd get the kid from Boise State that Chicago ended up picking. I think Seattle really screwed the pooch with that pick, but then Carroll's never been shy about picking up "questionable" characters in the past. Dallas trading up to get Claiborne might actually be the steal of the draft. It absolutely filled a HUGE need for them.

Poor Cleveland. You got the guy you were probably going to get anyway, but fuck's sake did you give up a SHITLOAD for it. 4 picks? He better be damn good. Whedon couldn't even hide his disappointment at being shipped off to the factory of sadness. I think with a run game, Colt McCoy will be a decent QB if they keep him and they absolutely should keep him (there's talk of trading him now) so long as Richardson works out in the running game. Minnesota did VERY well, getting all those picks, getting the guy they wanted anyway AND getting back into the first round to get the best safety available at the time. Tampa did good as well getting both Barron and the running back Martin. The Jags might have overpaid to get Blackmon, but holy shit, they need somebody that can catch the ball.

Defense really ruled this draft, especially pass rushers. Sure Luck and RG3 got the headlines, but once the marquee guys came off the board, it was defense, defense, defense except where a team needed an O-lineman really badly.

To be fair, Cleveland only gave up three picks and swapped spots. Most of those picks we gave up were from previous years' trade downs and chances of picking up a probowl stud post 4th round are slim. Browns were truly worried about the Bucs trading Minn and stealing their shot at Trent ... after the RGIII thing, yeah, I can see why. Weeden? I mean at 22? They could have waited - however, with Floyd and Wright off the board and thinking of taking Hill @ 22 was too high, I suppose they took a shot. They probably should have picked an OL at that spot, best available, then gone after a WR in the second round and leave Weeden till 3. Now they are stuck with a deflating McCoy and his rookie replacement who just happens to be almost 4 years older. Of course, this means Colt can go down to Jacksonville or Miami and get into the playoffs - which always seems to happen to ex-cleveland players.

Was texting my friend in Chicago last night who is a HUGE Browns fan and the texting abruptly stopped after Weeden was picked. 20 minutes later, all I got back was /wrists. If Hasselbeck v1.8 doesn't immediately step up this year, the Walrus is going to have a whole nation of Browns fans ready to tie him to the FREE Stamp statue in Cleveland and set him on fire. Every year the Browns preach about building through the draft and every year all our picks amount to mild successes or flat out busts. Time to reconsider using the draft guys...13 years and it hasn't worked once. Try Free Agency a couple of times...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bungee on April 27, 2012, 10:48:50 AM
True, but 4 picks in the first two rounds isn't too bad.  Although they are known for getting value you late in the draft.  To me it points to the fact that they see the clock ticking on Brady and want to pick high and put some pieces in that they don't have to develop much.  They want to take a couple more runs at this thing before he is done.

I've wondered why they kept moving out of the first the last couple years when they had multiple high picks as well seeing as their window got tighter every year. Guess BB just saw more value in this draft.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on April 27, 2012, 10:49:56 AM
Carroll's never been shy about picking up "questionable" characters in the past.

I really don't get how he is questionable. Seems like his is a feel good story or am I missing something? (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/nfl--west-virginia-prospect-bruce-irvin-ditches-burglary--drug-game-for-shot-at-nfl.html)


I really expected Jenkins to go before this train wreck. Feel good? Maybe... But in terms of football skill, is a great pass rusher, but leaves a lot to be desired on the run stoppage side.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on April 27, 2012, 11:07:40 AM
Maybe the Irvin kid has got his head on straight. It's entirely possible and I hope that's the case. It just seemed like a weird-o pick from a team with a coach who has what I consider questionable morals.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Raguel on April 27, 2012, 03:12:08 PM
For Cowboys fans only  :why_so_serious: (http://www.bloggingtheboys.com/2012/4/27/2980188/dallas-cowboys-draft-morris-claiborne-other-nfl-fans-react)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on April 27, 2012, 05:00:10 PM
My Niners fan friends are generally down on our pick. But you know, they all bitched about Aldon Smith too.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on April 27, 2012, 05:09:09 PM
My Niners fan friends are generally down on our pick. But you know, they all bitched about Aldon Smith too.

Quote
9. I think, after a conversation with one club official on a team that scouted receivers extensively this draft season, I felt better about the 49er pick of virtually unknown A.J. Jenkins from Illinois at No. 30. "We had him rated ahead of Michael Floyd,'' this club official said. "He didn't have a good quarterback to get him the ball, and he's raw. But he's fast. We liked him a lot.''

Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/peter_king/04/27/2012.nfl.draft.first.round/index.html#ixzz1tHz259rj


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on April 27, 2012, 06:53:11 PM
Jenkins problem wasn't that he didn't have a QB to throw to him as much as it was he was playing for a team "coached" by Ron the terribad Zook.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on April 27, 2012, 07:27:59 PM
MY turn to be down on a pick: LaMichael James, do not want.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 28, 2012, 07:31:55 AM
MY turn to be down on a pick: LaMichael James, do not want.

Why not?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on April 28, 2012, 09:44:31 AM
He hates the Ducks?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on April 28, 2012, 12:58:32 PM
MY turn to be down on a pick: LaMichael James, do not want.

Why not?


If he was only one out of the following 3 things:

1) an asshole
2) injury prone
3) can't break a tackle at all once you get a hand on him

Then I could deal. Problem is he seems to be all 3.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on April 28, 2012, 04:16:42 PM
Very odd draft for 49ers, time will tell but they seemed lost.

I bring you internet greatness (http://www.draftcountdown.com/forum/showthread.php?t=52641)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on April 28, 2012, 07:39:17 PM
That was awesome!  Soooo glad they drafted a protector for Stafford even though, being the Lions, they just HAD to get a WR.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on April 28, 2012, 07:55:25 PM
That was awesome!  Soooo glad they drafted a protector for Stafford even though, being the Lions, they just HAD to get a WR.  :oh_i_see:

Well, Calvin Johnson is on the cover of Madden this year so they needed a backup plan.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on April 29, 2012, 12:11:09 PM
Yeah no shit. I'm still not sure why athletes don't just block EA's number when the Madden folks start calling. "Yes, I'd love to get $50k to be the cover athlete. I don't need that ACL."


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on April 29, 2012, 12:22:05 PM
It's strange that the cover selection is now determined by a fan poll. Do you vote for or against your favorite players?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on April 29, 2012, 05:47:38 PM
That was awesome!  Soooo glad they drafted a protector for Stafford even though, being the Lions, they just HAD to get a WR.  :oh_i_see:

Well, Calvin Johnson is on the cover of Madden this year so they needed a backup plan.  :awesome_for_real:

Don't...even, I mean don't even JOKE about that man.  I'm the only Lions fan in my family, do you know how many Thanksgiving games I've had to endure?  DO YOU?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on April 29, 2012, 07:45:49 PM
Well it was nice watching the Browns grab T.Rich and I am even ok with taking Weeden, and the RT to help out with the run blocking... but in true Cleveland fashion, they shit the bed after that. a 5'9" WR?  Sigh. Another 3-13 season on the way. :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on April 29, 2012, 08:12:58 PM
I know a lot of people bag on Weeden because he is old, and because he doesn't have the flash of a guy like Griffin but I watched quite a few Ok State games last season and he showed a ton of poise and leadership ability.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on April 29, 2012, 08:44:40 PM
I think the Browns had one of the worst drafts in the league. They should have rolled the dice with Colt and spent that second pick on the offensive line or defense. If Colt still sucks ass with Richardson helping him then congrats you go get one of the top three QB's in 2013 draft whatever it takes and go from there.

Again I honestly think that Wheeden would be there for them at 67 and if he wasn't I cannot believe that they really thought he was that much of a safer gamble compared to Cousins/Wilson who in the 3rd/4th would be getting paid that much less.

Unless their picks on defense (which were pretty cool, there's a lot to like about Acho and the Nevada kid) work out though this is the draft that will doom Shurmur.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 29, 2012, 08:58:51 PM
Wheedon was a decent pickup, considering how shitty the Browns are at QB. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on April 30, 2012, 01:05:28 PM
Think about it like this. A 1st round QB pick isn't going to cost them more than $20 million and could work out really well. Or, it could if they weren't Cleveland.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on April 30, 2012, 01:28:32 PM
They could have had Kellen Moore for free basically too, I still expect him to be much better than people think.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 30, 2012, 01:33:54 PM
I doubt Kellen Moore will amount to much.  There's a reason that he went undrafted.  

Here (http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/30/kellen-moore-not-drafted-no-reason-to-feel-blue/#)'s a nice article on the subject.  

Quote
My response to the Kellen Moore crowd is, welcome to reality. In the N.F.L., arm strength counts. So does size. And speed. And athleticism. In a vacuum, none of these traits are vital. But even in a vacuum, each of them is more important than “being a winner.” Moore is a winner, sure. But he’s won at the amateur level. Simply put, that doesn’t matter to  N.F.L. talent evaluators.

It’s easy to see why. People don’t realize just how gargantuan the gap is between college and professional football. Take Alabama. It was the top program in college football this past year, and it also produced the highest number of draft picks this past weekend, eight. The 2011 Crimson Tide had 112 players on the roster. Let’s be generous and assume Bama can continue to produce eight draft picks each year. Eight players from the freshman, sophomore, junior and senior classes equals 32 players. So 32 members of the team will get drafted. That means 80 won’t.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on April 30, 2012, 02:46:57 PM
I am pleased with the last two drafts out of my Cowboys. I'm less pleased about the fact we still have our mental midget QB, but we only have to put up with him for 2 more years.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on April 30, 2012, 06:59:48 PM
They could have had Kellen Moore for free basically too, I still expect him to be much better than people think.

I think Moore will do well.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 30, 2012, 07:46:06 PM
Moore will probably never even play a down in the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: caladein on April 30, 2012, 07:57:15 PM
There's a reason that he went undrafted.

Because NFL personnel people make the scouts in the Moneyball movie look like the staff of Baseball Prospectus.

Ryan Lindley from SDSU (http://insider.espn.go.com/nfl/draft/player/_/id/28260) was picked in the 6th round by the Cardinals, he had a slightly lower overall grade to Moore on account of:

Mental Makeup: "puts too much faith in arm strength and throws into coverage far too often"
Accuracy: "far too inconsistent with his accuracy"
Pocket Mobility: "Pocket presence and mobility are below average"

but hey, he looks like a Quarterback:

Release/Arm Strength: "Arm strength is just a notch below elite"
Height-Weight-Speed: "Prototypical blend of height and weight"


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on April 30, 2012, 08:07:13 PM
Just because you are drafted high doesn't mean you will pan out (Ryan Leaf), but other than Tony Romo and Kurt Warner, I don't know of any undrafted QBs in the past 20 years that were worth a shit. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Slayerik on May 01, 2012, 08:14:25 AM
Moore was signed by Detroit. I hope Stafford has an injury free year, but there are still questions there IMO.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on May 01, 2012, 09:55:27 AM
Moore is still third on the depth chart (and will probably stay there). 

I personally will root for the guy.  He seems like a class act and a hard worker.  I just don't think he'll go anywhere.  He will, however, get the best job in the world, which is holding a clipboard on the sidelines of NFL games for a nice salary.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Slayerik on May 01, 2012, 11:46:57 AM
As a Lions homer, I can safely say that Shaun Hill sucks so.......I'd say that 2nd spot will be up for grabs in 2013.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on May 01, 2012, 01:04:25 PM
As a Lions homer, I can safely say that Shaun Hill sucks so.......I'd say that 2nd spot will be up for grabs in 2013.

And with Stafford's glass shoulders, it won't be long.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sauced on May 01, 2012, 01:42:56 PM
It's strange that the cover selection is now determined by a fan poll. Do you vote for or against your favorite players?

The Bears fan community was only divided over whose ballot box to stuff, Megatron or Rodgers.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on May 01, 2012, 01:45:33 PM
Can we start up a pool?  I've got 5 dollars on a collar bone break in the 4th game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on May 01, 2012, 02:54:43 PM
You people are crushing my spirit.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on May 01, 2012, 10:54:54 PM
Can we start up a pool?  I've got 5 dollars on a collar bone break in the 4th game.

I predict he will buck the trend and break the curse.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on May 02, 2012, 07:33:03 AM
I'm going to agree with Cyrex.  And I'm also going to predict a superbowl win.  


Edited to add this:

The Bucs have added former Rutgers player Eric Legrand to their 90 man roster (http://tracking.si.com/2012/05/02/tampa-bay-buccaneers-add-paralyzed-eric-legrand-to-90-man-roster/?sct=hp_t2_a5&eref=sihp).  He was paralyzed from the waist down while playing.  That is pretty goddamned cool. 

Quote
As a member of the Scarlet Knights, LeGrand suffered a devastating spinal injury in a game against Army in October of 2010. The defensive tackle attempted to wrap up an opposing player, but injured himself in the collision. He was carted off the field and taken to a nearby hospital where doctors determined he was paralyzed from the neck down. He has not walked in 19 months.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on May 02, 2012, 08:51:27 AM
That's pretty classy of them


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on May 02, 2012, 09:21:48 AM
4 players suspended for their roles in the bounty system (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7881761/nfl-bans-four-players-new-orleans-saints-bounty-roles). 

Johnny Vilma-  Season
Anthony Hargrove-  8 games
Will Smith-  4 games
Scott Fujita-  3 games

This seems like a pretty heavy handed deal for just 2 players.  While on paper it seems like a harsh deal, only a couple of players got really hit.  I find it hard to believe that it was just these four guys. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on May 02, 2012, 09:24:06 AM
Vilma was the one quoted as putting a 10k hit on Favre. I imagine that dollar amount and flagrancy of the action did not help him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on May 02, 2012, 09:29:56 AM
Yeah, not surprised at all by that suspension. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sauced on May 02, 2012, 10:54:21 AM
That's pretty classy of them

Indeed.  Greg Schiano, new Bucs coach, was the coach at Rutgers for the last decade or so.  Cool to see him do that.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on May 02, 2012, 11:26:27 AM
Junior Seau dead of apparent suicide. (http://www.10news.com/news/30993007/detail.html) :/


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on May 02, 2012, 12:05:52 PM
I just heard that on Yahoo. That's awful!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on May 02, 2012, 12:46:04 PM
One can only assume that his car wreck in 2010 (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/18/junior-seau-drives-suv-off-cliff-after-jail-release_n_766692.html) was a previous suicide attempt. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on May 02, 2012, 02:27:16 PM
That's terrible!  You just never know what folks are going through.

Curse of the '94 Chargers?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on May 02, 2012, 02:30:41 PM
Or one more piece of evidence for the whole head trauma thing. Sounds like he shot himself in the chest much like Dave Duerson did, so I expect they'll be able to shed some light on whether that was potentially involved.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on May 02, 2012, 02:33:33 PM
Concussions from football made him suicidal?  Is that a thing?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on May 02, 2012, 02:38:14 PM
Well not just from football, but yes, it is a thing. It isn't specifically always suicide, but it can lead to a lot of mental problems including serious depression (and thus suicide.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronic_traumatic_encephalopathy


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sauced on May 02, 2012, 02:49:42 PM
Concussions from football made him suicidal?  Is that a thing?

Duerson left specific details - he shot himself in the chest so they could properly study his brain.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on May 02, 2012, 02:55:51 PM
Regardless, one would hope that they would study Seau's brain too.  The head trauma thing isn't going away anytime soon (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=21952.0). 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on May 02, 2012, 07:38:39 PM
Concussions from football made him suicidal?  Is that a thing?

Duerson left specific details - he shot himself in the chest so they could properly study his brain.

I'd suspect Seau took that route so his brain could be studied. I can't fathom why anyone would commit suicide by shooting themselves in the chest... way too much room for error and too long a duration as opposed to the alternatives. There had to be something to it...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on May 03, 2012, 07:30:02 AM
Ravens just took a serious hit to their chances this season - Suggs tore his achilles playing basketball and is probably out for the year.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/ravens/ravens-insider/bal-suggs-could-be-done-for-year-20120503,0,4111173.story



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on May 03, 2012, 07:33:02 AM
Ravens just took a serious hit to their chances this season - Suggs tore his achilles playing basketball and is probably out for the year.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/ravens/ravens-insider/bal-suggs-could-be-done-for-year-20120503,0,4111173.story


As a football fan, Suggs is one insane beast and will be missed....

As a Browns fan...  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on May 03, 2012, 08:17:24 AM
I'd thought Seau commited suicide because he couldn't deal with post-NFL life properly.  It's gotta be tough to be such a long time player which that many accolades.  When something that intense has been part of your life, every year, since childhood...  That's tough.

RIP


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on May 03, 2012, 10:46:00 AM
I'd thought Seau commited suicide because he couldn't deal with post-NFL life properly.  It's gotta be tough to be such a long time player which that many accolades.  When something that intense has been part of your life, every year, since childhood...  That's tough.

RIP

Depression and dementia (another serious issue stemming from concussions) will really hurt your chances with dealing with life.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on May 03, 2012, 10:56:19 AM
There's a definite link between chronic pain, depression and repetitive head trauma. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on May 03, 2012, 02:52:11 PM
Ravens just took a serious hit to their chances this season - Suggs tore his achilles playing basketball and is probably out for the year.

http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/ravens/ravens-insider/bal-suggs-could-be-done-for-year-20120503,0,4111173.story

Saw that. It's a HUGE deal for them. Lewis is declining and Suggs was their main LB star. That team has missed their window for a Super Bowl. Flacco has proven he can't handle the big games, IMO. He almost lost them that Houston game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on May 17, 2012, 01:19:52 PM
Johnathan Vilma sues Roger Goodell for defamation (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Jonathan-Vilma-sues-Roger-Goodell-for-defamation.html)

 :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on May 17, 2012, 01:25:15 PM
 :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on May 17, 2012, 01:27:06 PM
My sports boner continues to grow over how poorly the Taints are dealing with this issue.

And I love the fact that they still haven't offered their only salvation a contract. Tell you what Saints? If you don't want to deal, I'm sure Jerry would love Brees's phone number.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on May 17, 2012, 01:29:22 PM
Yeah, not giving the keys to the kingdom to Drew Brees this late in the game is just pants on head retarded. The man pretty much saved your fucking franchise (along with Payton, of course). He won the only fucking Super Bowl you ever got to. He loves playing for you, he loves the community, and his squeaky clean image makes your entire franchise look better. It should have been handled a year ago. If you can't afford him, you should fucking trade him for a lot of future picks because by God, you know you could get a king's ransom for him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on May 17, 2012, 07:29:14 PM
LOL, Raiders. (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/football/nfl/05/17/rolando.mcclain.sentenced.raiders.ap/index.html?sct=hp_t2_a14&eref=sihp)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on May 18, 2012, 07:02:42 AM
Players with guns.

It's like players in clubs after midnight.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on May 18, 2012, 07:08:05 AM
Players with guns.

It's like players in clubs after midnight.

Or both, if you're Plaxico Burress.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on May 18, 2012, 07:09:28 AM
Yes he's a special brand of failure on that one.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on May 18, 2012, 01:07:01 PM
I think he would prefer you to call him efficient.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sir T on May 19, 2012, 09:11:03 AM
The caption to the photo

Quote
Rolando McClain allegedly pointed a guy at a man's head and threatened to kill him before firing it beside his ear.

 :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Zetleft on May 23, 2012, 10:36:56 AM
Lawsuit time in the NFL

http://m.deadspin.com/5912702/union-files-collusion-lawsuit-against-nfl-alleging-secret-123-million-salary-cap-in-uncapped-year (http://m.deadspin.com/5912702/union-files-collusion-lawsuit-against-nfl-alleging-secret-123-million-salary-cap-in-uncapped-year)

http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=7963260 (http://m.espn.go.com/nfl/story?storyId=7963260)

May be a big payday to the players after all.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on May 23, 2012, 11:59:24 AM
HA! The NFL can't win on this one. If they agree there was a cap, then the players win. If they prove there wasn't a cap then the Cowboys and Redskins win.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on May 23, 2012, 12:31:18 PM
Or they could just lawyer their way along and settle. Which is very likely going to be what happens.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on May 23, 2012, 01:15:57 PM
Settling doesn't mean you win. In fact, I'd rather fight the player one and let the Cowboys and Skins off the hook as that costs me nothing.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on May 23, 2012, 01:22:03 PM
I wasn't looking for winning. I was looking for mitigated lose and shifting the story to a point in time when no one will care. Of course, most fans don't actually care about the machinations of millionaires anyway.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on May 29, 2012, 12:17:42 PM
Well it went through arbitration that fell on the side of the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on June 01, 2012, 08:52:28 AM
"Some QB I Used To Know"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lETl9vA9VWw


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on June 01, 2012, 09:12:29 AM
God, I hate that fucking song.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on June 01, 2012, 09:56:48 AM
I had not heard of it somehow until the parody.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on June 01, 2012, 11:50:34 AM
I heard of it yesterday when I read EW's 12 Best Singles of 2012 So Far story. 10 out of 12 I couldn't finish listening to. I'm OLD.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on June 01, 2012, 04:44:51 PM
"Some QB I Used To Know"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=lETl9vA9VWw

That was great! LOL


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on June 15, 2012, 01:16:24 PM
The NFL is making the All 22 film available to (almost) anyone. (http://deadspin.com/5918786/the-nfl-will-make-its-all+22-film-available-to-everyone-next-year-and-football-writing-will-never-be-the-same-again)

I know there was mention of this a while again in another nfl thread - but I think this is great.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on June 15, 2012, 01:34:36 PM
You know you are a football geek when that news makes your day. Really looking forward to learning a lot more about coverages and offensive reads and options. Very exciting!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on June 15, 2012, 01:53:21 PM
You know you are a football geek when that news makes your day. Really looking forward to learning a lot more about coverages and offensive reads and options. Very exciting!

I absolutely agree!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on June 15, 2012, 03:16:48 PM
You know you are a football geek when that news makes your day. Really looking forward to learning a lot more about coverages and offensive reads and options. Very exciting!

I don't expect I'll be able to subscribe to get the All 22 film, but I am hoping that at least one of the highlight shows uses it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on June 15, 2012, 06:08:19 PM
Too bad I can't subscribe to a single team's games with All-22 LIVE. They have an online package for $35 to get all games of a single team, but it's only on-demand, after the fact, not live games.

But glad that the All-22 is going to be available. Wish the networks would show it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on June 15, 2012, 06:39:55 PM
Well, we always sort of knew the reason they didn't release all-22 was because they suspected demand wasn't high enough for people to actually PAY for it.

Then, they found out otherwise.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on June 16, 2012, 01:58:42 AM
Quote
Charley Casserly, a former general manager who was a member of the NFL's competition committee, says he voted against releasing All-22 footage because he worried that if fans had access, it would open players and teams up to a level of criticism far beyond the current hum of talk radio. Casserly believed fans would jump to conclusions after watching one or two games in the All 22, without knowing the full story.

That cracks me the fuck up.

"The FANS, they might be critical of our play! aieee!"


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on June 16, 2012, 08:55:22 AM
That's the hilarious part to me as well, because with the entire coverage of the field, we would know the whole story. You can't jump to conclusions when you see what happened in front of your eyes.

Unless your gameplan was to fuck up a coverage, in which case, yeah you have a right to be criticized.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on June 16, 2012, 01:04:03 PM
Quote
Charley Casserly, a former general manager who was a member of the NFL's competition committee, says he voted against releasing All-22 footage because he worried that if fans had access, it would open players and teams up to a level of criticism far beyond the current hum of talk radio. Casserly believed fans would jump to conclusions after watching one or two games in the All 22, without knowing the full story.

That cracks me the fuck up.

"The FANS, they might be critical of our play! aieee!"

Christ, like facts or knowledge will affect the mouth breathing slacktards that call into talk radio.  The fact that it's actually impossible to fully understand the game at the X and O level as it's currently shown on TV is part of the fucking problem with the sport.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on June 16, 2012, 01:08:51 PM
Ask a "big football fan" what an illegal shift is. More than half will have no clue.

People simply don't care about the X's and O's on a large scale. That's reserved for nerds like us.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on June 18, 2012, 03:12:11 PM
Speaking of Illegal Shifts. NFL showed 12 reporters the same stuff they showed the players today. Sounds damning.

https://twitter.com/#!/AdamSchefter

https://twitter.com/#!/SI_PeterKing

"The $35k bounty on Favre, the league claims, included a $5000 pledge from current interim Saints coach Joe Vitt."

Just take the franchise away.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on June 18, 2012, 03:36:43 PM
Hahaha they were complaining about no evidence?

There's an exhibit with the defensive players called "2010 Kill the Head Totals"

There's another where they hold up the actions of General Blackjack Pershing as a solid idea.

There's several where they detail the exact cash structure with names and events for the players getting bounties.

It just goes on and on and on. Even the slides where they don't say something about the bounties, you get a very accurate picture of exactly how stupid they really are in their everyday lives.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on June 18, 2012, 03:45:14 PM
Serious question, what IS an illegal shift?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on June 18, 2012, 03:49:04 PM
Serious question, what IS an illegal shift?

2 men in motion that don't become reset for a second before the ball gets snapped.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on June 18, 2012, 03:51:07 PM
Oh, we don't have that in the CFL  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on June 19, 2012, 04:35:38 AM
Oh, we don't have that in the CFL  :why_so_serious:

We know. You silly Canadians with your "cross the line of scrimmage at full tilt when the ball is snapped" wide receivers.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on July 17, 2012, 10:43:42 PM
Is it just me or has this been a particularly bad offseason for players getting arrested?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on July 18, 2012, 06:37:21 AM
Is it just me or has this been a particularly bad offseason for players getting arrested?

I believe there were over 40 in 2010. It went down in 2011, but we're roaring back in 12. A lot of it is because the recent ones are bigger names.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on July 18, 2012, 06:46:23 AM
Yeah, the incidents are surely getting a lot of press.  But it will be the NBA that still has all the thugs in the media's eye. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on July 18, 2012, 08:15:13 AM
Dez Bryant smacks around his mama, Marshawn Lynch and a few others apparently can't afford taxis when they are out at "da club." So seriously, WTF? Hopefully going to be a lot of game checks forfeited this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on July 18, 2012, 08:32:02 AM
That doesn't even take into account all the Saints nonsense, which obviously contributes to the feeling of general douchiness in the NFL right now. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on July 18, 2012, 08:35:58 AM
Every NFL team provides a car service to it's players specifically to avoid these kinds of things. Right now, 25 players have been arrested since the Super Bowl.

Here's a list: Ray McDonald, Rey Maualuga, JT Thomas, Mikel Leshoure, Nate Collins, Leroy Hill, Jarriel King, Mikel Leshoure (again, both for pot), Samson Satele, Koa Misi, Nick Fairley, Darrius Heyward-Bey, Brandon Meriweather, Caleb King, Nick Fairley (again!), Jerome Felton, Justin Blackmon, David Diehl, Aaron Berry, Muhammad Wilkerson, Eric Wright, Kiane Tripp, Adrian Peterson, Dion Lewis, Elvis Dumervil, Marshawn Lynch, and Dez Bryant.

Only 14 teams haven't had a player arrested. That means the majority have had an arrest.

Also, a shout out to David Diehl for being the lone honky on that list.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on July 18, 2012, 08:46:49 AM
Fuck Diehl for being a pro-Chief douchebag.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on July 18, 2012, 09:07:24 AM
Even if the NFL didn't provide a car service, a taxi is well within even the minimum league salaried player's means. It shows an incredible amount of stupidity to be caught driving drunk in this day and age as an NFL player. For a $30 taxi ride, you can avoid losing a game day check likely worth at least $50 grand.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on July 18, 2012, 09:20:13 AM
I'll look for the link, but I recall some discussion about the offered car service and it was considerably more expensive than a straight up cab ride. Moot point though, since no one seems to select either choice.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on July 18, 2012, 10:40:30 AM
It's $85/hr.

I think a lot of the issue (outside of stupidity of the players in question and those that haven't been caught) is the confusion of the program's existence and who's running what. I liked theose two articles on the issue. The first one was posted, and the second one was a response to the first article


http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/mike-freeman/19303326/nfl-to-remind-all-employees-this-is-dangerous-time-for-dui-offenses
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d829b6720/article/safe-rides-program-still-open-to-players-nflpa-says



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on July 18, 2012, 10:44:01 AM
$85 an hour is nothing when you compare to the $1000 a night these guys will drop in a bar.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on July 18, 2012, 12:29:27 PM
And it looks like the union fucked it up partly because they were afraid teams were using it to spy on their players.

Sounds to me like the union needs to start finding a way to hammer into these meatheads skulls how much money stupid shit like drunk driving can cost them in fines and lost wages from game suspensions.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on July 18, 2012, 12:55:14 PM
Or explain how they could fucking kill someone and ruin their family's lives in addition to ending up in jail for a significant amount of time. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on July 18, 2012, 03:13:50 PM
Or explain how they could fucking kill someone and ruin their family's lives in addition to ending up in jail for a significant amount of time. 

Impacting someone else's life will mean a lot less than "taking away a game check" to most of the assholes we're talking about. I mean Dez Bryant was beating up on his GODDAMN MOTHER. I'm sure he gives not one gram of fuck for someone else's life.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on July 18, 2012, 04:06:30 PM
To be fair, his mother is a reported drug addict and prostitute.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 18, 2012, 04:54:32 PM
She didn't have some, not half, but all his cash, obv.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Raguel on July 18, 2012, 09:21:59 PM
She didn't have some, not half, but all his cash, obv.

I doubt Dez is going to win any awards this year...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on July 19, 2012, 08:17:33 AM
Speaking of convicts, Michael Vick needs to shut his fucking mouth (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8180116/michael-vick-believes-philadelphia-eagles-develop-dynasty) and win some football games. 

Quote
"When I look at our football team and what we have on paper, I think about when I was growing up and the great San Francisco 49er teams, the great Green Bay Packer teams, and the great Dallas Cowboy teams, how they just positioned themselves to compete and be one of the best teams out there," Vick said, one season after the Eagles finished a disappointing 8-8.


They are going to be the dynasty of .500 if he keeps giving other teams bulletin board material.  What a fucking idiot.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on July 19, 2012, 08:57:33 AM
Hell, they won't even be 8-8 this season. Their schedule is a trainwreck of top tier teams.

Baltimore, Detroit, Pittsburgh, NYG, Atlanta, NO, and Cincy were all in the playoffs last year. That's 8 games right there against playoff opponents. Then you have to play an improved Tampa team on the road, and 2 games against Dallas who will be looking for revenge from losing both last season. There's maybe 5 easy games on that schedule. In fact, Red Zone ranked your schedule as the 6th toughest in the league.

GOOD LUCK!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on July 19, 2012, 09:00:11 AM
The Eagles could be very good.  They have a lot of talent.  But you got to, at a minimum, have a winning record before you start talking about dynasties, right?  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on July 19, 2012, 10:21:29 AM
The eagle's success depends on who their quarterback is.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on July 19, 2012, 10:55:28 AM
Hell, they won't even be 8-8 this season. Their schedule is a trainwreck of top tier teams.

Baltimore, Detroit, Pittsburgh, NYG, Atlanta, NO, and Cincy were all in the playoffs last year. That's 8 games right there against playoff opponents. Then you have to play an improved Tampa team on the road, and 2 games against Dallas who will be looking for revenge from losing both last season. There's maybe 5 easy games on that schedule. In fact, Red Zone ranked your schedule as the 6th toughest in the league.

GOOD LUCK!

My Browns are 3rd! WE ARE FINALLY HIGH ON A LIST of some sort!  :heartbreak:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on July 19, 2012, 11:56:20 AM
Yet still no championship even on a list that is shitting on you  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on July 19, 2012, 12:23:16 PM
http://deadspin.com/5924462/why-your-team-sucks-2012-san-diego-chargers?tag=why-your-team-sucks-2012

Hilarious.  :awesome_for_real:

Quote
"Be sure to mention how we've pinned ALL of our pass rush hopes on Melvin Ingram, who has arms like Tyrion Lannister. Rivers sucked last year because we had a dogshit offensive line, so we signed Jared Gaither, who was released by the Kansas City Chiefs, which is like being thrown out of Cracker Barrel for being too white trash. Now we're depending on him to keep laserface upright. AND LASTLY NORV FUCKING TURNER IS OUR COACH. He strikes fear in the heart of Accutane salesman, but no one else."


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on July 19, 2012, 01:50:29 PM
http://deadspin.com/5924462/why-your-team-sucks-2012-san-diego-chargers?tag=why-your-team-sucks-2012

Hilarious.  :awesome_for_real:

Quote
"Be sure to mention how we've pinned ALL of our pass rush hopes on Melvin Ingram, who has arms like Tyrion Lannister. Rivers sucked last year because we had a dogshit offensive line, so we signed Jared Gaither, who was released by the Kansas City Chiefs, which is like being thrown out of Cracker Barrel for being too white trash. Now we're depending on him to keep laserface upright. AND LASTLY NORV FUCKING TURNER IS OUR COACH. He strikes fear in the heart of Accutane salesman, but no one else."

Why your team sucks 2012 Cleveland Browns.

We really don't need a reason...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on July 19, 2012, 02:22:56 PM

Why your team sucks 2012 Cleveland Browns.

Because you are from the earthly home of Howard the Duck and your uniforms are the color of poo.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on July 20, 2012, 09:17:51 AM
The Eagles could be very good.  They have a lot of talent.  But you got to, at a minimum, have a winning record before you start talking about dynasties, right?  :awesome_for_real:

They had a lot of talent last year, they still barely finished .500. Since we know Vick won't be on the field for 16 games this year, a lot will depend on how good their backup QB options are... oh.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on July 20, 2012, 09:50:55 AM
If he does happen to stay on the field for the full 16 games they could be tough.  Otherwise they're looking at a losing record, IMO.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on July 20, 2012, 09:59:33 AM
They'll be a tough out regardless - Desean Jackson and McCoy are just that good.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on July 23, 2012, 09:35:42 AM
I'm sorry to report that Chad Ochocinco has changed his name back to Johnson (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8191660/chad-ochocinco-miami-dolphins-says-last-name-johnson-again).   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on July 23, 2012, 11:52:19 AM
Yeah, busy day. Chad's name changed, Aaron Berry released from the Lions for being a repeat dumbass, and Louis Murphy goes to the Panthers (normally a Murphy move doesn't draw interest to me but when it is improving an already powerful offense this could be worth mentioning).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on July 23, 2012, 03:39:43 PM
(https://dl.dropbox.com/u/82533/facepalm01.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on July 23, 2012, 03:40:29 PM
Ichiro to the Yankees. Glad to see him get a chance for some post season baseball; also glad the Mariners won't have to have the 'yeah, we need you to take a $15M pay cut' conversation in the offseason. Wish the Ms could have gotten it done while he was here. GL to him.

I think Ichiro is going to get owned in the NFL instead of being in the American League.   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on July 23, 2012, 03:41:19 PM
Hm, that probably means they won't want to trade for Schierholtz. Oh well.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 23, 2012, 05:18:11 PM
I was blinded by my tears?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on July 27, 2012, 06:10:11 AM
I feel for you man, I actually yelled at my car radio when I heard it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on July 27, 2012, 06:47:57 AM
This one's for the Seattle fan.

http://deadspin.com/5929379/why-your-team-sucks-2012-seattle-seahawks

Quote
Why hello there, Tarvaris Jackson, YOU PIECE OF SHIT. I don't know why you're still on the team. The Seahawks signed Matt Flynn to replace you, which makes sense given that you have been mediocre at best despite playing with a dangerous rushing offense on two different teams. And yet Pete Carroll has said that ol' T-Jack has the starting job unless Flynn proves himself more worthy.

You know how the Seahawks are supposed to benefit from the 12th Man in Seattle? They lost three home games by less than a touchdown in 2011, all with chances to win in the 4th quarter. Let's look at those games:

Oct. 2: Falcons 30, Seahawks 28 — With the Seahawks down 24-7 at the half, Jackson performs admirably to get the Seahawks back in the game. With 1:49 left in the game and no timeouts, T-Jack completes a series of short checkdowns over the middle to set up a 61-yard field goal. Miss. Seahawks lose. T-Jack isn't at fault here, but neither is he impressive under pressure.

Nov. 27: Redskins 23, Seahawks 17 — The Seahawks start the quarter by gaining a 17-7 lead. As the Redskins "storm" back with field goals, here are the four final Seahawks' possessions: 3 and out, 3 and out, turnover on downs in 4 plays, interception on third play. Jackson's numbers on those drives: 4-7 for 22 yards, 2 sacks that ended possessions, and a game-sealing INT. In front of a home crowd. AGAINST THE REDSKINS.

Dec. 24: 49ers 19, Seahawks 17 — Even with Jackson struggling against the very good Niners D, the Seahawks take a 17-16 lead after a blocked punt gives the 'Hawks the ball on the 4, an easy one-play touchdown drive thanks to Marshawn Lynch. After San Francisco answers with a field goal, the Seahawks get the ball twice in the final three minutes. Those possessions end in a T-Jack fumble and a quick turnover on downs due to incompletions.

None of this takes into account the 23-20 Week 17 OT loss in Arizona where Jackson engineered a three-and-out before the 'Hawks punted and gave up a field goal.

The Seahawks have a very good young defense. They have a great running game with an improving offensive line. They have arguably the best home-field advantage in the NFL. Their coach... is, uh, better than Jim Mora. But they're trotting out the same incompetent dickbag who single-handedly kept them from a winning record EVEN THOUGH THEY SIGNED SOMEONE BETTER TO REPLACE HIM.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 27, 2012, 08:21:46 AM
I would have loved to get to write that section. Maybe next year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on July 27, 2012, 08:25:12 AM
If they don't start Flynn they need to fire Pete Carroll tomorrow.  That's just insane. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on July 27, 2012, 09:08:29 AM
If they don't start Flynn they need to fire Pete Carroll tomorrow.  That's just insane. 

FTFY. I do not understand why any NFL team hired him for a head coaching position.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 27, 2012, 09:18:30 AM
If they don't start Flynn they need to fire Pete Carroll tomorrow.  That's just insane. 

FTFY. I do not understand why any NFL team hired him for a head coaching position.

This.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on July 27, 2012, 09:24:25 AM
Yeah, I agree with you guys there.  I mean, I guess he's a serviceable NFL head coach, but I don't think he's a good enough coach to win a superbowl. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on July 27, 2012, 09:36:26 AM
If they don't start Flynn they need to fire Pete Carroll tomorrow.  That's just insane. 

Anyone who doesn't think they will start Flynn is a fool.  They just don't announce such things this early. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on July 27, 2012, 09:39:17 AM
I'm just going to say this... as a Broncos fan, these comments work perfectly if you equate TJax to Orton and Flynn to Tebow. I just sure hope it all ends up better for Seahawks fans. The conversation is identical.... with a little bit of Carrol = McDaniels thrown in.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on July 27, 2012, 09:44:08 AM
If they don't start Flynn they need to fire Pete Carroll tomorrow.  That's just insane. 

Anyone who doesn't think they will start Flynn is a fool.  They just don't announce such things this early. 

Well, we are talking about Pete Carroll.......Didn't he have some pretty glowing things to say about Tarvaris Jackson when they signed him? 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on July 27, 2012, 09:58:44 AM
I'm just going to say this... as a Broncos fan, these comments work perfectly if you equate TJax to Orton and Flynn to Tebow. I just sure hope it all ends up better for Seahawks fans. The conversation is identical.... with a little bit of Carrol = McDaniels thrown in.

Orton was and is a much better QB than everyone on that list except maybe Flynn, and the jury is still out on him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on July 27, 2012, 10:08:40 AM
I don't disagree. I never disliked Orton and he got a bad rap, and very very very happy that Tebow was run out of town. The actual text of the conversation is what reminded me of it. This exact conversation was all that happened for 2 years on Broncos forums.

If they don't start Flynn they need to fire Pete Carroll tomorrow.  That's just insane. 

Anyone who doesn't think they will start Flynn is a fool.  They just don't announce such things this early. 

Well, we are talking about Pete Carroll.......Didn't he have some pretty glowing things to say about Tarvaris Jackson when they signed him? 

Of course he did. Do you expect him to say "Welp, oh well."


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on July 27, 2012, 10:10:40 AM
He should have run up to the GM and punched him directly in the balls.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 27, 2012, 10:20:20 AM
That would be tough, since his hand is up the GM's asshole. PC is the director of football operations. Schneider technically reports to him, I believe.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on July 27, 2012, 10:22:37 AM
That would be tough, since his hand is up the GM's asshole. PC is the director of football operations. Schneider technically reports to him, I believe.

Wouldn't that make it easier? I mean, he does have two hands, and if his hand is up his ass, he's already close.

He should have run up to the GM and punched him directly in the balls.

Brian Xanders = Schneider. IT ALL WORKS. Enjoy your Matt Tebow.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on August 02, 2012, 11:08:50 AM
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8225861/randy-lerner-sells-cleveland-browns-more-1b-sources-say

I have no clue what to make of this... a Steelers fan and investor buying the Browns from Randy? Lebron who?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on August 02, 2012, 01:39:12 PM
Yeah, that's lil Jimmy Haslam.  They have a trucking/truckstop empire here in east TN.  He and his brother, who is our Governor, are Tennessee Oilers, if you will. 

They say he is a big football fan and played for UT back in the General Neyland days.  Can't be bothered to google.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on August 02, 2012, 04:23:51 PM
I think the more amazing part of that story is that someone somewhere anywhere thinks the Browns are worth ONE BILLION FUCKING DOLLARS.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 02, 2012, 04:24:25 PM
I am not sure the entire city of Cleveland is worth that.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on August 02, 2012, 04:35:51 PM
Well the franchise is a goldmine with a history and fanbase that has proven itself by backing this woeful team (myself, sadly, included).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on August 02, 2012, 04:39:12 PM
What history, it started in 1999.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on August 02, 2012, 04:43:37 PM
You're such a jerk.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on August 03, 2012, 07:39:17 AM
Frank Caliendo is no longer part of the Fox pre-games, finally.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 03, 2012, 08:15:07 AM
I would rather sit through 10 minutes of Caliendo every week if it meant I didn't have to listen to Joe Buck drone on. God he is terrible. Lucky for me that the Seahawks are shitty enough to not draw the #1 crew very often.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 03, 2012, 08:21:22 AM
I'd rather listen to the dancing robot give commentary then either of them.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 06, 2012, 06:59:01 AM
It's looking more and more like Kevin Kolb is going to be a huge bust.   He had a "bruised chest" and finished 1-4 for 4 yards with an intereception (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp12/story/_/id/8237891/kevin-kolb-arizona-cardinals-leaves-preseason-game-bruised-ribs) in their scrimmage against the Saints. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 06, 2012, 08:21:48 AM
(http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/14/42/16/3285929/5/628x471.jpg)

 :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 06, 2012, 09:24:25 AM
That's one of the weirdest things I've ever seen. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 06, 2012, 01:54:03 PM
Wow.  Boomer Esiason completely annihilates Tim Tebow in these quotes (http://newyork.cbslocal.com/2012/08/06/boomer-esiasons-memo-to-jets-cut-tim-tebow/). 

I honestly don't know why New York is screwing around with him at QB. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on August 06, 2012, 01:55:52 PM
Trying to attract more Chik-Fil-A franchises?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 06, 2012, 01:57:56 PM
Quote
“You can say whatever you want about Tim Tebow,” said Esiason. “He played some of the worst football that any quarterback has ever played in the history of the game last year at times.”

 :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: caladein on August 06, 2012, 02:07:01 PM
In pure football terms, it's not insane.  Tebow is certainly a Top 5 QB for a goal line package.  Ideally, you'd also get a pretty good passer in the same player (read: Cam Newton), but the Jets don't have that option and Tebow was inexpensive to acquire.

As for actually running a football team, there's a lot of downsides and everyone's gone over them a million times.  Maybe Ryan figures he can ride those out and still reap the rewards of having... whatever he thinks Mark Sanchez actually is at QB AND a really good goal line offense, but I sort of doubt it.  The Jets majorly successful year came when they spent boatloads of money during the uncapped year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 06, 2012, 02:08:07 PM
Well, I guess Tebow may not be helping their "locker room issues" (http://espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/story/_/id/8239546/new-york-jets-players-brawl-fans-team-practice). 



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 06, 2012, 02:15:17 PM
In pure football terms, it's not insane.  Tebow is certainly a Top 5 QB for a goal line package.  Ideally, you'd also get a pretty good passer in the same player (read: Cam Newton), but the Jets don't have that option and Tebow was inexpensive to acquire.

Tebows effectiveness dropped through the floor as the season progressed. They lost 3 straight at the end of the season. When you know his gimmick, it's easy to plan against with a halfway decent defense. Denver's D helped mask the Tebow crap quite a lot.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 06, 2012, 02:24:01 PM
When you look at how Elway dealt with him it's easy to see what his thoughts about him were.  Sure they got Manning, but if they had their man they wouldn't have been looking for Manning.  I look for Tebow to be out of the league or a tight end in less than 2 years. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 06, 2012, 02:28:37 PM
When you look at how Elway dealt with him it's easy to see what his thoughts about him were.  Sure they got Manning, but if they had their man they wouldn't have been looking for Manning.  I look for Tebow to be out of the league or a tight end in less than 2 years. 

That would have to have been a great man. You pretty much try to get Manning no matter what. Orton was a good QB that got a bad rap for a team that was filled with issues. Unless you have one of the few quarterbacks that are upper tier. Elway handled everything really well, honestly. I was impressed. Hell, Manning was impressed with how things were being handled too, which is why he ended up there. (Broncos fan btw.)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: caladein on August 06, 2012, 02:38:24 PM
In pure football terms, it's not insane.  Tebow is certainly a Top 5 QB for a goal line package.  Ideally, you'd also get a pretty good passer in the same player (read: Cam Newton), but the Jets don't have that option and Tebow was inexpensive to acquire.

Tebows effectiveness dropped through the floor as the season progressed. They lost 3 straight at the end of the season. When you know his gimmick, it's easy to plan against with a halfway decent defense. Denver's D helped mask the Tebow crap quite a lot.

Are you referring to goal line stuff or in general?  I agree with the latter completely, as any sane person would, Tebow as an every-down QB is a car crash in slow motion.

The numbers may back up both cases though, I haven't looked at them in an age.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on August 06, 2012, 02:42:01 PM
I think they'll use Tebow for stunts and trick plays.  Jets be crafty! *snerk*


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 06, 2012, 02:48:34 PM
In pure football terms, it's not insane.  Tebow is certainly a Top 5 QB for a goal line package.  Ideally, you'd also get a pretty good passer in the same player (read: Cam Newton), but the Jets don't have that option and Tebow was inexpensive to acquire.

Tebows effectiveness dropped through the floor as the season progressed. They lost 3 straight at the end of the season. When you know his gimmick, it's easy to plan against with a halfway decent defense. Denver's D helped mask the Tebow crap quite a lot.

Are you referring to goal line stuff or in general?  I agree with the latter completely, as any sane person would, Tebow as an every-down QB is a car crash in slow motion.

The numbers may back up both cases though, I haven't looked at them in an age.

Just looking at some simple stats. He was never OMG AMAZING scoring machine, he just had thrilling moments. People seem to think he was scoring TDs left and right, which he simply wasn't. The defense generally would keep the game within striking distance. When they faced a solid defense and offense is when they were exposed.

WEEKPASS TDSRUSH TDSW/L
720W
810L
920W
1011W
1101W
1210W
1320W
1410W
1502L
1611L
1700L


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 06, 2012, 03:07:00 PM
I would say that 80% of the teams considered if they could get Manning at least on some level.  I like the Broncos too, although I don't really have a "team" in the league.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 06, 2012, 03:15:21 PM
Looks like Cleveland is going with Weeden as their starter.  I'm expecting great results.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on August 06, 2012, 03:18:47 PM
There's about 5 QB's in the league you would never consider trying to replace with Peyton Manning this offseason. Tebow sure as fuck ain't one of them. He was a goddamn trainwreck as a QB who only won so many games on defense and trickeration. That Denver D was fucking SCARY good and will likely be better this year. Their offense stunk on ice and it wasn't just from Tebow's 47% completion percentage. Pittsburgh got caught in the playoffs overplaying the Tebow factor in OT with a defense that underachieved and a QB that was hurt all season long.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 06, 2012, 03:50:57 PM
I'll point to 3 games that let you & me know Tebow wasn't an NFL QB.

#1 - The 40-14 drubbing by the (at that point) hapless Buffalo Bills. Buffalo lost 8 of their last 9 games, but they beat the Broncos because Tebow threw 3 picks and the special teams was awful. Starting with the 2nd quarter, up by 7 mind you, the Broncos went 4&out, 4&out, 4&out, 4&out, TD pass, 4&out, INT, 4&out, Pick6, fumble6, INT, turnover on downs.

#2 - The 3-7 loss to the Chiefs the next week. The Chiefs were a walking wounded barely functional team by the latter half of the season, and they only scored one TD for the entire game, yet they still beat Tim Tebow. He only went 6-22 with 50 net yards, a pick, and a fumble. Were it not for McGahee rushing his ass off and burning clock, they wouldn't have even gotten the FG they did. Denver controlled the ball for 33m and got 3 points. That's wretched. ANYTHING from Tebow would have won that game.

#3 - The 45-10 asskicking by Detroit. Tebow passed for 117 net yards, got sacked 7 times, threw a pick, and would have gotten skunked if the Lions didn't let up a garbage time TD in the 4th. In their first possession, Tebow had the ball at Detroit's 21 and a fresh set of downs. The ball never moved and they settled for a FG. That was the best chance they got until the Lions were done with them. Tebow threw a pick six that went 100 yards from end zone to end zone in that game. He had a sack fumble TD in that game. There were over 7 times they went 4&out. It was unequivocally the worst QB performance I've ever seen out of anyone playing the game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on August 07, 2012, 09:57:19 AM
You forget to add that in #1, the Bills defense was pretty wretched all last year, especially at getting turnovers. It was so bad, they overpaid for Mario Williams to get him to help out. And in #3, you are forgetting that the Lions also had a notoriously shitty secondary last year. For #2, though, the Chiefs couldn't score any points but their defense actually gave Green Bay their only regular season loss last year - so they weren't totally as bad as the other 2 examples. But yeah, Tebow sucks.

Also, hey Way? How you like them T.O. apples (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp12/story/_/id/8240307/terrell-owens-signs-contract-seattle-seahawks)?

God, the Seahawks are set to absolutely self-destruct this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on August 07, 2012, 10:38:11 AM
Yeah but Jesus.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on August 07, 2012, 10:43:31 AM
Fucker is as old as me and runs a 40 in 4.45? holy shit that guy is still a freak.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 07, 2012, 10:46:25 AM
Yeah, he ought to go well with Tarvaris Jackson.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 07, 2012, 11:06:56 AM
They signed him for the league minimum. Not exactly a terrible call given apparently how he performed in his workout. Also, it looks as if Matt Flynn will be the starter right now in Seattle. I would not be surprised if T Jax is up for trade by the time the season starts.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on August 07, 2012, 12:24:27 PM
T.O. is locker room poison, though.  Has he ever been on a team where he didn't bad-mouth his own quarterback?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 07, 2012, 12:25:09 PM
T.O. is locker room poison, though.  Has he ever been on a team where he didn't bad-mouth his own quarterback?

Only if he was crying while praising them, first.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on August 07, 2012, 12:28:12 PM
T.O. is locker room poison, though.  Has he ever been on a team where he didn't bad-mouth his own quarterback?
Maybe the Niners when Steve Young was QB?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on August 07, 2012, 12:35:09 PM
Who gives a shit, just look at who is coaching and you'll find your answer. (P.T. Barnum is getting jealous up in heaven or whatever his spirit ended up)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on August 07, 2012, 01:29:36 PM
They signed him for the league minimum. Not exactly a terrible call given apparently how he performed in his workout. Also, it looks as if Matt Flynn will be the starter right now in Seattle. I would not be surprised if T Jax is up for trade by the time the season starts.

This. Also, I do think it would be awesome if Carroll can keep him under control and productive as that would bring Sea's WR corps to a decent yet hilarious level. They would then have Doug Baldwin, Golden Tate, Sidney Rice, TO, and Braylon Edwards and all of them combined are dirt cheap but have potential to be productive with a decent QB throwing to them imo (which Flynn potentially is a decent or better QB, at least an ugparde of Jackson). They have improved their QB to Flynn, Lynch can have another good year which will help the passing game's potential, and they upgraded TE and now have a tandem of Zach Miller and Kellen Winslow

I think outside of Flynn and Lynch, they could very well be the best offense per dollar spent :why_so_serious: Granted that isn't saying much, but it would be a fun stat to compare teams with


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on August 07, 2012, 01:58:06 PM
Half those guys will be hurt by the end of preseason.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 07, 2012, 02:35:36 PM
T.O. is locker room poison, though.

Right. But, if he proves to be a problem, they can cut him and not worry about it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on August 07, 2012, 02:39:07 PM
I look forward to seeing T.O.'s ego fight with Sidney Rice's.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 07, 2012, 03:11:18 PM
And Braylon Edwards. And Kellen Winslow Jr.

Unless they complete 75 passes a game and the ball is spread around, there will be a lot of sandy vaginas and pouting. I sincerely hope it all blows up in a giant mushroom cloud of hate and angst and ego that leads to Pete Carroll being strung up by his testicles and beaten all the way out of town.

To sum up- FUCK PETE CARROLL FOREVER.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on August 07, 2012, 03:15:21 PM
Maybe Braylon and Kellen can ride their motorcycles together?  :why_so_serious:

I totally forgot you got Winslow AND Edwards on that team. The over/under on fights at practice has got to be ridiculous.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 07, 2012, 03:16:06 PM
Bet they don't get as rough as the Jets practices...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on August 07, 2012, 03:17:33 PM
IKNOWRITE????  :awesome_for_real:

I'm fucking loving this Rex Ryan Shcaudenfraude as his entire team just dissolves into fucking pissing matches. The best part is that Santonio Holmes hasn't even started throwing hissy fits yet.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 07, 2012, 03:21:03 PM
Shockingly, Elvis Dumervil has been cleared of all charges (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8244359/denver-broncos-elvis-dumervil-charged-road-rage-case) related to his gun waving incident.  I'm a little shocked, considering all the gun nonsense that has been going on the US lately. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on August 07, 2012, 03:23:11 PM
And Braylon Edwards. And Kellen Winslow Jr.

Unless they complete 75 passes a game and the ball is spread around, there will be a lot of sandy vaginas and pouting. I sincerely hope it all blows up in a giant mushroom cloud of hate and angst and ego that leads to Pete Carroll being strung up by his testicles and beaten all the way out of town.

To sum up- FUCK PETE CARROLL FOREVER.
I'm gong to enjoy watching WAP's head explode if the Seahawks make the playoffs again under Carroll. :awesome_for_real:



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 07, 2012, 03:55:56 PM
So how long do we wait to start doing our Preseason Predictions? Week 3 of the Preseason?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 07, 2012, 04:22:03 PM
Pete Carroll has the most fucked up nose that I've ever seen. 



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 08, 2012, 08:48:24 AM
And Braylon Edwards. And Kellen Winslow Jr.

Unless they complete 75 passes a game and the ball is spread around, there will be a lot of sandy vaginas and pouting. I sincerely hope it all blows up in a giant mushroom cloud of hate and angst and ego that leads to Pete Carroll being strung up by his testicles and beaten all the way out of town.

To sum up- FUCK PETE CARROLL FOREVER.
I'm gong to enjoy watching WAP's head explode if the Seahawks make the playoffs again under Carroll. :awesome_for_real:



Now that SF is legit this is a lot more unlikely than it used to be. I have taken steps to voodoo doll SF though- I kept their defense as one of my 3 keepers in one of my FF leagues. They should get torched regularly.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on August 08, 2012, 01:01:43 PM
Our schedule is roughly a billion times harder this year, so yeah. Also there's no way Alex Smith throws only 5 INTs this time around. I'm a reasonably strong advocate of him being actually pretty good, but that was a statistical anomaly even if he IS good.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 08, 2012, 01:20:54 PM
Our schedule is roughly a billion times harder this year, so yeah. Also there's no way Alex Smith throws only 5 INTs this time around. I'm a reasonably strong advocate of him being actually pretty good, but that was a statistical anomaly even if he IS good.

SF's strengh of schedule is 26th in the league.  :oh_i_see:

Last year it was 30th.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 08, 2012, 01:21:33 PM
Our schedule is roughly a billion times harder this year, so yeah. Also there's no way Alex Smith throws only 5 INTs this time around. I'm a reasonably strong advocate of him being actually pretty good, but that was a statistical anomaly even if he IS good.

For the most part you play the same teams.. however.... Dolphis get Cowboys and Panthers while Niners get Giants and Saints.  :awesome_for_real:

That being said, Seahawks have the harder SOS. http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/56896/2012-nfl-strength-of-schedule


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 08, 2012, 01:23:12 PM
I find it incredibly fucked up that the two easiest SoS's are GREEN BAY AND NEW ENGLAND  :mob:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on August 08, 2012, 01:26:04 PM
I don't know about SF having a much tougher schedule than Sea or even compared to last year's SF schedule. Since they're in the same division they play almost all the same opponents. The difference here is thate SF has to play a N.O. team without it's head coach, quite likely without one of it's best defensive players (on an already not very impressive Def), and with the stand-in head coach only having returned from being suspended not too far before SF plays NO. The other team SF plays which Sea doesn't is NYG. Regular season NYG are hit or miss, who knows what side of the 8-8 NYG (who have lost players in both free agency and quite likely to injury at the rate they're going). Both NO and NYG could cause problems

On the flipside, Sea has to play a Car team which in 2011 was no where near the shit team it was in 2010, and is much improved even further for 2012, and then Dal which similar to NYG you don't know what you're getting in that match.

Both Sea and SF have improved, but not enough improvement in Sea to take over the division as long as Smith keeps interceptions under 10 - given his receiving corps and addition to the backfield this shouldn't be too difficult. I do agree that 5 int is an anomaly though



fake edit - bah while typing this up sickrubik and Paelos posted. Looking at SoS rating now

True edit - not fully agreeing with the SoS, though NE does appear to have a really nice schedule


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 08, 2012, 01:31:00 PM
The difference between SF and Sea is.. well, they play each other.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on August 08, 2012, 01:38:01 PM
To clarify, I meant our schedule this year was harder than our schedule last year, not that it was harder than Seattle's.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 08, 2012, 01:38:33 PM
Playing shit is still playing shit. Your schedule is a breeze.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 08, 2012, 01:59:37 PM
I will say one thing. Looking at that SOS ranking thing... I just depressed myself.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on August 08, 2012, 02:04:12 PM
Poor Browns and Rams :(  That's a tough row to hoe. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: tazelbain on August 08, 2012, 02:05:38 PM
Division champions should have a winning record or they forfeit their playoff slot to an extra wildcard.  These garage divisions are a disgrace.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on August 08, 2012, 02:24:12 PM
Division champions should have a winning record or they forfeit their playoff slot to an extra wildcard.  These garage divisions are a disgrace.

I agree but it'll never happen.

SOS formulation or not, playing in the NFC West with even a half-decent team should net you at least 4 wins. That division did get better this year, I must admit, but I don't think it's that much better. The real cream puff division is the AFC South.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 08, 2012, 02:32:42 PM
The NFC East and NFC West were both equally awful last year. It's just that the Giants were better at the end because they weren't injured. Thing is, the NFC East has improved a lot, and the NFC West hasn't.

The AFC South is the absolute shitpile of the NFL. It's just so not even close.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 08, 2012, 03:36:23 PM
Division champions should have a winning record or they forfeit their playoff slot to an extra wildcard.  These garage divisions are a disgrace.

They should be relegated to the Independence Bowl. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on August 08, 2012, 03:45:15 PM
They should just have a selection committee of totally unbiased voters select the teams they feel are worthy to be in the playoffs based on their body of work and the opponents they played.   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on August 08, 2012, 03:46:52 PM
I see what you did there.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 08, 2012, 05:10:02 PM
They should just have a selection committee of totally unbiased voters select the teams they feel are worthy to be in the playoffs based on their body of work and the opponents they played.   :why_so_serious:

You could have SB Nation do it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on August 08, 2012, 06:04:19 PM
Ah, Giants. I hope Eli properly stretches his face muscles before games.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 09, 2012, 01:00:12 PM
Preseason games start for realz tonight. Enjoy the first series before all the starters are sipping Gatorade and wearing headphones.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Johny Cee on August 10, 2012, 08:56:00 AM
Pats/Saints was on last night.  Not terribly exciting and the coverage was the shitty Boston-market sports media (I think).

Chandler Jones was a bright spot, and he looked pretty fucking good.... it didn't sink in until they showed him on the sidelines and I realized who he was.   His brothers are Arthur Jones (DT on the Ravens) and Jon Jones (UFC LHW champ).  Talk about ridiculous athletic talent in that family!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 10, 2012, 09:00:14 AM
The backup refs for the NFL last night called the Atlanta team "Arizona" twice during penalties.  :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on August 10, 2012, 09:25:13 AM
Because I know everyone here cares so much about the Tampa Bay Bucs.  :awesome_for_real: I was wondering if anyone else had caught some of the local commercials showing Schiano as a back-to-basics coach who values hard work and upstanding citizenry.

Imagining a Seahawks commercial got me to thinking about this:  I was wondering if their local sales folks would be pushing Caroll walking through a landfill and picking up garbage (I'm looking squarely at you, K2) for his team.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on August 10, 2012, 09:27:41 AM
Because I know everyone here cares so much about the Tampa Bay Bucs.  :awesome_for_real: I was wondering if anyone else had caught some of the local commercials showing Schiano as a back-to-basics coach who values hard work and upstanding citizenry.

Imagining a Seahawks commercial got me to thinking about this:  I was wondering if their local sales folks would be pushing Caroll walking through a landfill and picking up garbage (I'm looking squarely at you, K2) for his team.

Nah... Maybe more sorting through a thrift store filled with misfit toys.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 13, 2012, 06:13:56 PM
Well the first preseason game for the Cowboys is a dumpster fire. Glad we're getting this out of the way (hopefully).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on August 14, 2012, 09:22:55 AM
Well the first preseason game for the Cowboys is a dumpster fire. Glad we're getting this out of the way (hopefully).

It will get worse. I thoroughly expect the Cowboys to have a better defense this year, while their offense implodes majestically.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on August 14, 2012, 09:30:07 AM
Guesses as to how long it takes for SEA to take a flyer on Ochocinco?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 14, 2012, 09:50:12 AM
I'm not sure they can unless word comes out he didn't do it.

The problem with the fact he hit his wife is that the NFL, several top players, and the President of the United States have recently been touting an anti-domestic violence campaign this season during games. His timing for doing this couldn't be worse.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 14, 2012, 10:00:19 AM
I'm not sure they can unless word comes out he didn't do it.

The problem with the fact he hit his wife is that the NFL, several top players, and the President of the United States have recently been touting an anti-domestic violence campaign this season during games. His timing for doing this couldn't be worse.

As long as your productivity is down... *coughs*Dez Bryant*coughs*


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 14, 2012, 10:40:36 AM
What a fucking asshole.  Ever since "Meshawn" Johnson got to the league receivers have been a bunch of fucking primadonna twatfaces.  I say fire his ass and ban him from the league (even if it is hypocritical).  I'd ban Bryant as well-  he's a fucking moron. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 14, 2012, 11:25:20 AM
What a fucking asshole.  Ever since "Meshawn" Johnson got to the league receivers have been a bunch of fucking primadonna twatfaces.  I say fire his ass and ban him from the league (even if it is hypocritical).  I'd ban Bryant as well-  he's a fucking moron. 

If you ban Bryant, it's not hypocritical.

And it's nothing to do with receivers, people of all positions seem to get arrested on a regular basis for stupid shit.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 14, 2012, 12:20:41 PM
Large difference between Bryant and Johnson.

Bryant's mom denies that any family violence occured. Johnson's wife is filing charges.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on August 14, 2012, 12:30:36 PM
Large difference between Bryant and Johnson.

Bryant's mom denies that any family violence occured. Johnson's wife is filing charges.
That's what she says now but that's not what happened at the time. She's just being a mother and protecting her son.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 14, 2012, 12:53:09 PM
Yeah, we very likely will see similar stuff in a few months for Johnson. It's quite seriously only because Bryant's production is greater than Johnson's. It's BS, but output overrides any sort of issue like that.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 14, 2012, 01:02:10 PM
What a fucking asshole.  Ever since "Meshawn" Johnson got to the league receivers have been a bunch of fucking primadonna twatfaces.  I say fire his ass and ban him from the league (even if it is hypocritical).  I'd ban Bryant as well-  he's a fucking moron. 

If you ban Bryant, it's not hypocritical.

And it's nothing to do with receivers, people of all positions seem to get arrested on a regular basis for stupid shit.

They should ban Johnson even if they don't do anything with Bryant.  I don't care if it's hypcritical.  Get as much bad o ut as you can.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 14, 2012, 01:10:14 PM
Large difference between Bryant and Johnson.

Bryant's mom denies that any family violence occured. Johnson's wife is filing charges.
That's what she says now but that's not what happened at the time. She's just being a mother and protecting her son.


Be that as it may, it's an important legal distinction between the two cases.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 17, 2012, 07:06:11 AM
Ground Emerges As Tim Tebow's Favorite Target (http://www.theonion.com/articles/ground-emerges-as-tim-tebows-favorite-target,29210/)

Quote
“As we get into camp, more and more often Tim has been throwing to the ground,” center Nick Mangold said. “During plays, he just has this instinct for finding the ground every time. It’s becoming apparent to everyone on the team that the ground is Tim’s go-to target.”

“He just loves throwing it right to the ground,” Mangold added. “It doesn’t matter if the defense comes out in man coverage or an overload blitz. Tebow seems to know exactly where the ground will be and hits the wide-open turf every time.”

 :drillf:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 17, 2012, 07:11:44 AM
That's a supurbly done article.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on August 17, 2012, 03:01:01 PM
That's just brilliant.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on August 17, 2012, 04:01:44 PM
So true story.  I was reading this while I was in a public bathroom.

There's something awkward about laughing your ass off while in a stall.

Thanks for this.   :drill: :drillf: :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on August 17, 2012, 04:07:36 PM
In other news, olympic 4x100 silver medallist Jeff Demps has signed with the Pats

Watching some film of him; he is fucking rapid. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bW4X664GRt0&feature=player_embedded)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 17, 2012, 04:13:28 PM
That was against Kentucky so it doesn't count.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 20, 2012, 11:38:20 AM
Haha.  Apparently DaSean Jackson didn't give a full effort last year (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp12/story/_/id/8285546/desean-jackson-philadelphia-eagles-give-full-effort-2011) because he didn't want to get hurt in a contract year.  They should cut his ass.

Addendum-  also excited to see how Locker does with the Titans.  I like him as a player and I have a feeling he can do more with a decent team around him than he could show in Warshinton. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 20, 2012, 11:42:31 AM
Yet another reason not to pay wide receivers.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on August 20, 2012, 12:29:29 PM
What a fucking douche.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on August 20, 2012, 03:37:00 PM
Agreed.  Cut him.  Also, it's now official, the JAKE LOCKER era begins in Tennessee!

*crickets*  Anyone?  Hello?  Is this on?

There is no Hasselbeck there is only THE HURT LOCKER.

Hmm nickname needs work.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on August 21, 2012, 12:37:09 PM
Jags to replace the Rams as the London home team until 2016 (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000052627/article/shad-khan-roger-goodell-announce-jaguars-london-deal?module=HP11_headline_stack)

It also looks like the NFL is pushing hard for two games next year too; which as a native I am quite happy about.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 21, 2012, 12:39:53 PM
I think it would be rather cool to have an NFL team in London.  I'm not sure about the logistics of it though. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 21, 2012, 12:40:05 PM
The NFL ambassador to the world is the Jacksonville Jaguars?

Let me be the first to apologize to England for this decision. Also, it gets my bullshit senses tingling that they want that franchise in Jacksonville long term.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 21, 2012, 12:42:36 PM
The NFL ambassador to the world is the Jacksonville Jaguars?

Let me be the first to apologize to England for this decision. Also, it gets my bullshit senses tingling that they want that franchise in Jacksonville long term.

Better than the Rams!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on August 21, 2012, 12:43:43 PM
At this rate, am I wrong in thinking there is no way Vick survives this season?  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on August 21, 2012, 12:45:47 PM
The NFL ambassador to the world is the Jacksonville Jaguars?

Let me be the first to apologize to England for this decision. Also, it gets my bullshit senses tingling that they want that franchise in Jacksonville long term.

Better than the Rams!

I think I'd rather watch Bradford than anyone on the Jags... even MJD. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 21, 2012, 12:45:58 PM
Vick is going to be turned into a pile of quivering brown and bloody goo by the third game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on August 21, 2012, 12:53:39 PM
At this rate, am I wrong in thinking there is no way Vick survives this season?  

Yes, but only because he may not make it out of the preseason.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on August 21, 2012, 01:15:12 PM
Best job in the world? Vick's backup. You get trotted out 3 or 4 times over the course of two seasons when he coughs up a lung, then get traded and signed to a gigantic contract you can never live up to before disappearing into obscurity with your guaranteed money.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 21, 2012, 01:17:22 PM
Fuck having a team permanently in London. It is shitty enough on West Coast teams to go back East and play games at 10AM body clock time. Subtract another 5 hours from that? No fucking way.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on August 21, 2012, 01:34:16 PM
Isn't that why the games are played at night, so the timing isn't really an issue? I don't know how sporting events are in the UK, but I can't imagine there being too much issue with 8 night games within a couple months span (and possibly up to 11 if somehow the Uk team gets homefield in 3 rounds of the playoffs to continue making that a non-issue. I'd guess they'd definitely want all night games in the UK not only for the US to see the game within normal viewing times, but also for higher advertising dollars in both the Uk and US since you know the NFL will try to squeeze out as much as they can from every market possible.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on August 21, 2012, 01:37:50 PM
Clearly the best solution is to make every team play at least one game in London. 32 teams, 16 games. London gets a full season without needing a franchise.

 :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on August 21, 2012, 01:43:20 PM
Best job in the world? Vick's backup. You get trotted out 3 or 4 times over the course of two seasons when he coughs up a lung, then get traded and signed to a gigantic contract you can never live up to before disappearing into obscurity with your guaranteed money.

Isn't that Matt Cassell's life story (sans Vick)?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on August 21, 2012, 01:50:57 PM
Best job in the world? Vick's backup. You get trotted out 3 or 4 times over the course of two seasons when he coughs up a lung, then get traded and signed to a gigantic contract you can never live up to before disappearing into obscurity with your guaranteed money.

Isn't that Matt Cassell's life story (sans Vick)?

Kolb's story.  At least Cassell played and entire season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 21, 2012, 01:57:17 PM
Isn't that why the games are played at night, so the timing isn't really an issue? I don't know how sporting events are in the UK, but I can't imagine there being too much issue with 8 night games within a couple months span (and possibly up to 11 if somehow the Uk team gets homefield in 3 rounds of the playoffs to continue making that a non-issue. I'd guess they'd definitely want all night games in the UK not only for the US to see the game within normal viewing times, but also for higher advertising dollars in both the Uk and US since you know the NFL will try to squeeze out as much as they can from every market possible.

They don't even bother doing it in America. EST teams play at both 1PM EST and 4PM EST. Do you think that perhaps the NFL could possibly dictate that they play at 4PM when West Coast teams visit? Of course they COULD. Why they don't is a mystery. Seriously, fans wouldn't even notice. It is such a simple solution to a very real problem (that West Coast teams are at a sizeable disadvantage when playing in the morning), but nothing gets done.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on August 21, 2012, 02:24:43 PM
No, but there's a major difference here. If they push the morning games on the west coast to a later time, then the second game would interfere with the NBC Sunday night game which is absolutely huge for popularity and revenue (is my understanding). However, if they push the games in London to a night game at all times, then it's a night game in London and a day time game in the US. Yes, the west coast has it a bit rougher trying to play/watch the morning game, but I don't think it's as major of a disadvantage as you're making it to be as they also have it easier watching/playing the night games.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 21, 2012, 02:38:16 PM
The morning games aren't on the West Coast, they are on the East Coast. My contention is that when a WC team plays IN those games (on the road, in the morning), they are at a disadvantage. Turns out I am not the only one who has noticed-

http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/09000d5d8286246e/Football-Freakonomics-Body-clock

http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/content/discomfort-zone-impact-travel-nfl-games/14372/

I am sure the London games would kick off at 9:15PM GMT or something like that, which would sync them with the late day games on the regular schedule. Still a giant pain in the ass for 2 teams, and an even bigger pain if one or both is from the Pacific Time Zone.

I am seriously baffled as to why 2 East Coast teams can play a game at 4pm local time, but more often than not the WC visitor has to play at 10AM. I am sure TV has something to do with it, but the NFL could easily dictate this change with a very minimum of interruption.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on August 21, 2012, 02:44:06 PM
Is there really a pent up demand for an NFL team in London?  Any Euro friends here care to weigh in?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 21, 2012, 02:47:14 PM
I am seriously baffled as to why 2 East Coast teams can play a game at 4pm local time, but more often than not the WC visitor has to play at 10AM. I am sure TV has something to do with it, but the NFL could easily dictate this change with a very minimum of interruption.

You would be right. TV is responsible. The 4PM and later slots are usually reserved for matchups that can be played nationally, or have playoff implications. The 1PM slots are where the majority of the scrub games go. Outside of the 49ers last year, the rest of the Western Division teams in both leagues were complete ass to watch. In fact, I'm trying to think back to when the Western divisions produced a wild card (AFC or NFC). Let's find out!

Looks like it was Kansas City in 2006 with a 9-7 tiebreaker against the Broncos. So yeah, if those division can put together a remotely watchable product, they will get the 4PM slot. Otherwise, it's going to the NFC East, the AFC North, or whichever team Tom Brady or Aaron Rodgers happen to play that week.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 21, 2012, 03:01:07 PM
So let's keep them at a competitive disadvantage! That will certainly help.  :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on August 21, 2012, 03:37:17 PM
No one likes them anywayas, it's fine :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 21, 2012, 04:24:56 PM
So let's keep them at a competitive disadvantage! That will certainly help.  :uhrr:

To be fair, the Denver thing with Tebow got a ton of press and 4PM games last year.

Monday night games had Oakland @ Denver week 1, SD @ KC Week 8, SD @ Jacksonville Week 13, St Louis @ Seattle Week 14, & Pitt @ SF Week 15,

That's a lot of MNF.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 26, 2012, 08:46:59 PM
Good god, Pete Carroll is a fucking retard (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp12/story/_/id/8305648/seattle-seahawks-tab-rookie-russell-wilson-week-1-starter). 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on August 26, 2012, 10:24:00 PM
Good god, Pete Carroll is a fucking retard (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp12/story/_/id/8305648/seattle-seahawks-tab-rookie-russell-wilson-week-1-starter). 

While he is indeed a retard, I'm not sure I have a problem with what he is doing here.  Flynn's elbow is bugging him, and Wilson has been playing lights out, so why not roll the dice.  Flynn has proved absolutely nothing, in my opinion (even if I am hopefully that he ultimately will).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on August 27, 2012, 05:13:02 AM
I for one hope to hell that Wilson starts and gets them into the playoffs. That would be a nice big FUCK YOU to everyone thinking you need to be this tall to ride the starting QB position unless you are named Brees.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on August 27, 2012, 05:42:07 AM
I for one hope to hell that Wilson starts and gets them into the playoffs. That would be a nice big FUCK YOU to everyone thinking you need to be this tall to ride the starting QB position unless you are named Brees.

Short dudes unite!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on August 27, 2012, 05:43:06 AM
I for one hope to hell that Wilson starts and gets them into the playoffs. That would be a nice big FUCK YOU to everyone thinking you need to be this tall to ride the starting QB position unless you are named Brees.

You miss Doug Flutie, admit it!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 27, 2012, 07:59:00 AM
Good god, Pete Carroll is a fucking retard (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp12/story/_/id/8305648/seattle-seahawks-tab-rookie-russell-wilson-week-1-starter). 

While he is indeed a retard, I'm not sure I have a problem with what he is doing here.  Flynn's elbow is bugging him, and Wilson has been playing lights out, so why not roll the dice.  Flynn has proved absolutely nothing, in my opinion (even if I am hopefully that he ultimately will).

Let's just say that Wilson's the guy.  The NFL isn't a league where you just throw guys in and have them do well unless they're Peyton Manning.  It's not a common occurrence.  I would prefer to ease my QB of the future into that role a little slower, because we all know NFL preseason games are just a notch above the Pro Bowl in competitiveness.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 27, 2012, 08:43:22 AM
I will say that Wilson has done nothing but impress so far. However, we have played 2 terrible teams and one so so team so far, and he only played against the backups for the first two. He has a surprisingly good arm, is nimble as fuck, and makes good, quick decisions. He will definitely struggle when teams start game planning against him and defenses do more to disguise what they are doing. That being said- Flynn has been fine, but is dinged up, and Wilson has outplayed him (slightly, imo).

Thank FSM TO fucked off, and LMAO @ them finding a taker for TJack. He was gonna be free in about 10 days, but if the Bills want to send a pick over, that is just fine by me.


3 drafts over the weekend, one more (quick online, thankfully) to go tonight. I am burned out on FF and the season hasn't even started! Seattle D looks really good. They were first off the board in 2/3 (3rd was a keeper league and I kept the SF D as one of my 3 keepers, which shows you the vomity depth I had...still made the playoffs though!). That is obviously skewed because I was drafting with groups primarily made up of Seahawks fans, but still- they should probably be a top 3 D at worst. Tons of turnovers, stingy on points, and Leon Washington is always a threat to score on kick returns.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 27, 2012, 10:58:50 AM
Turns out that now both QBs from one of the best national championship games I've ever watched (USC v. Texas) have turned to complete shit. Vince Young was ditched by the Bills for Tavaris Jackson. That's gotta be a new low.

Oh and Matt Leinart is now a 3rd string backup to a 32 year old QB that got rejected by the Bungles.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 27, 2012, 11:01:51 AM
My issue with Wilson is that he is tiny.  The first time he scrambles against a for real defense he's going to get his head stuck up his ass.  He obviously had a decent arm in college, but so does Flynn.  I'll be surprised to see Wilson starting by Christmas.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on August 27, 2012, 11:31:15 AM
The pre-season means shit.  I am just surprised to see a coach not understanding that.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on August 27, 2012, 11:39:13 AM
Matt Flynn has a bad elbow. Not sure what else Carroll could do *but* start Wilson.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 27, 2012, 12:03:16 PM
Matt Flynn has a bad elbow. Not sure what else Carroll could do *but* start Wilson.


He could start a man on a unicycle. That would fit with the team motif so far.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 27, 2012, 12:05:39 PM
He could start a man on a unicycle in a clown suit. That would fit with the team motif so far.

(http://quarlesome.files.wordpress.com/2010/06/ron-popple-juggler-unicyclist.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on August 27, 2012, 12:12:48 PM
Turns out that now both QBs from one of the best national championship games I've ever watched (USC v. Texas) have turned to complete shit. Vince Young was ditched by the Bills for Tavaris Jackson. That's gotta be a new low.

It really fucking does. When "all you do is win" gets trumped by "well, he couldn't throw worth shit with Adrian Peterson running behind him, but he's breathing," your career is fucking over.

Also, I predict Russell Wilson won't be the starter by week 4 unless Flynn's elbow falls the fuck off.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 27, 2012, 04:19:44 PM
Vince Young is probably done, I would imagine. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on August 27, 2012, 05:00:58 PM
Which is a shame.  He was the prototypical modern QB but he was a delicate flower even before his mentor was, you know, murdered.  Maybe someday we'll find out why he's such a headcase.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 27, 2012, 05:51:22 PM
I don't think he's necessarily a headcase, I just think he likes to party. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 27, 2012, 06:20:57 PM
Bah wrong thread. Taunting Haemish in the wrong place.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sir T on August 29, 2012, 05:30:39 AM
Sorry to interrupt, but I've started watching a bit of American football, and I don't have a clue about what I'm looking at. Can anyone point me at a good idiots giude to american football website? Thanks


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 29, 2012, 05:55:57 AM
This (http://www.thedaily.sk/an-idiots-guide-to-american-football/) seems like a reasonably short read on the subject. 

The Wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_football) on it isn't too bad either. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on August 29, 2012, 07:48:34 AM
Sorry to interrupt, but I've started watching a bit of American football, and I don't have a clue about what I'm looking at. Can anyone point me at a good idiots giude to american football website? Thanks

Trick is to watch with someone who already knows. That is how we are indoctrinated here... Dads, Uncles, Grandfathers, and sometimes the women-folk will chime in with opinions and descriptions - and as long as their teams are winning, they are usually open to questions. How I know anything about football being a Browns fan is beyond me; other than the brief span of decent seasons in the 80s.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on August 29, 2012, 10:36:28 AM
WARNING! Most Americans think that they understand football... few actually do.  It's like soccer in that the game is MUCH deeper than it appears on the surface.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on August 29, 2012, 10:47:08 AM
Sorry to interrupt, but I've started watching a bit of American football, and I don't have a clue about what I'm looking at. Can anyone point me at a good idiots giude to american football website? Thanks

Do you have any specific questions?  I am not the most knowledgeable person about the game (never played as a kid or anything), but I'll certainly try to answer any questions if I can. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on August 29, 2012, 10:53:40 AM
WARNING! Most Americans think that they understand football... few actually do.  It's like soccer in that the game is MUCH deeper than it appears on the surface.  

Well yeah... but who cares? It is THE American sport's spectacle...we don't need to understand it to enjoy bitching about it.  :awesome_for_real:

But I do agree with you. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on August 29, 2012, 11:26:57 AM
Soccer does not have the depth that football.

In any case, once you have the basics down about the game get this book:

http://www.patkirwan.com/

Example: http://www.patkirwan.com/play-diagrams/most-effective-personnel-group-most-effective-formation-right-now-nfl


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on August 29, 2012, 11:33:45 AM
Soccer does not have the depth that football.

Where did someone say this? 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 29, 2012, 11:44:41 AM
I love soccer, but it isn't as complex as American football. It is FAR more complex than it appears on the surface, however. It is just that handegg is even more complicated than it appears.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on August 29, 2012, 12:00:17 PM
Play a season of Blood Bowl.  It's about the same, I promise!   :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on August 29, 2012, 12:01:20 PM

Example: http://www.patkirwan.com/play-diagrams/most-effective-personnel-group-most-effective-formation-right-now-nfl

That was great.  It explains so much about the game in one example.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on August 29, 2012, 12:05:17 PM
Soccer does not have the depth that football.

Where did someone say this? 

It isn't even a complete sentence!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 29, 2012, 12:39:43 PM

Example: http://www.patkirwan.com/play-diagrams/most-effective-personnel-group-most-effective-formation-right-now-nfl

That was great.  It explains so much about the game in one example.

Fuck. This made me want to buy Madden.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on August 29, 2012, 01:22:43 PM
WARNING! Most Americans think that they understand football... few actually do.  It's like soccer in that the game is MUCH deeper than it appears on the surface.  

I have no idea what I watching many times.  Particularly where line play us concerned, I tend to not get all the nuances.  I blame having not played when I was a kid.  Well, I played, but kicker doesn't count.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Llyse on August 29, 2012, 05:22:03 PM
Play a season of Blood Bowl.  It's about the same, I promise!   :drill:

I tip my hat to you sir!

I think if I manage to follow this season of NFL I'll have to sign up for my first fantasy league next year...   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on August 29, 2012, 09:26:15 PM
WARNING! Most Americans think that they understand football... few actually do.  It's like soccer in that the game is MUCH deeper than it appears on the surface.  

The actual X's and O's of each play didn't matter to me as much as watching for the now expanded stage of ACT/REACT going on before a snap when I was a newer fan.

Were I telling someone who was averagely familiar with the rules what to look for, I'd suggest they watch pre-snap reads. By that I mean you have a defensive set, and an offensive formation. The veteran QB is looking at the defensive set with 2 plays that he's called in the huddle. The first play is the standard, but he can kill that play if he doesn't like what the Defense is showing. Often you can hear the QB yell KILL KILL KILL to go to an audible, or they can change it with certain code phrases like LANDMARK BLUE 76.

Once that happens, the Middle Linebacker (or defensive captain) can yell out audibles to his defensive players to adjust their formations. They can switch to blitzes or check out of them, they can adjust the direction of rushes, or they can maneuver to different coverage packages. All of this can happen with the ACT/REACT on both sides in a matter of seconds. It's really fun to watch the chess match before every snap while the defense makes feints at the line, and the QB tries to decipher what's real from the coverage.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on August 30, 2012, 07:26:50 AM
Explaining this is hard to new viewers, though, unless you are willing to freeze the game a lot and point things out.  That can turn a 3 hour game into a 4 hour game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on August 30, 2012, 08:02:25 AM
Explaining this is hard to new viewers, though, unless you are willing to freeze the game a lot and point things out.  That can turn a 3 hour game into a 4 hour game.

I can watch film on a single game for 24+ hours.  The game is incredibly intricate. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on August 30, 2012, 08:05:50 AM
Explaining this is hard to new viewers, though, unless you are willing to freeze the game a lot and point things out.  That can turn a 3 hour game into a 4 hour game baseball.

FIFY


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on September 04, 2012, 02:52:21 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/tMXUk.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 04, 2012, 03:10:47 PM
What point are you trying to make with this? 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 04, 2012, 03:40:47 PM
Look at the team name for #19.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 04, 2012, 03:58:01 PM
Ah.  I guess I see.  Probably would have been more obvious to see the whole list as sometimes they put weird shit in these things. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Megrim on September 04, 2012, 06:39:45 PM
Explaining this is hard to new viewers, though, unless you are willing to freeze the game a lot and point things out.  That can turn a 3 hour game into a 4 hour game.

I just started watching with some small input from friends, and got most of the stuff figured out within about half-dozen games. I'm sure that there is some 2deep4u level that I'm missing, but it gets balanced out by laughing at how apparently terrible Americans are at tackling. Watching some defender make vague pawing gestures at the ball-carrier, then sort of just tip over to the side is hilarious.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 04, 2012, 06:46:00 PM
Explaining this is hard to new viewers, though, unless you are willing to freeze the game a lot and point things out.  That can turn a 3 hour game into a 4 hour game.

I just started watching with some small input from friends, and got most of the stuff figured out within about half-dozen games. I'm sure that there is some 2deep4u level that I'm missing, but it gets balanced out by laughing at how apparently terrible Americans are at tackling. Watching some defender make vague pawing gestures at the ball-carrier, then sort of just tip over to the side is hilarious.

God damn arm tackling. It's terrible technique and needs to be beaten out of 90% of the league.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 05, 2012, 07:27:49 AM
Ah.  I guess I see.  Probably would have been more obvious to see the whole list as sometimes they put weird shit in these things. 

Yes, they put something weird in it. That was exactly the point.

Anyway, here's the relevant link: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000057974/article/nfl-power-rankings-saints-falcons-up-patriots-eagles-down


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 05, 2012, 07:57:19 AM
Now I guess you have to wonder if they did it on purpose.  One would have to assume, since they haven't changed it. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 05, 2012, 08:02:41 AM
Also, Jason Whitten is a fucking moron (http://espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/story/_/id/8339672/sources-dallas-cowboys-jason-witten-sign-waiver-play).   :oh_i_see:

Quote
Witten has informed the team he is willing to sign a medical waiver that would not hold the Cowboys or team doctors liable in case he re-injured his lacerated spleen during the NFC East matchup, according to team sources.

 :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 05, 2012, 08:20:41 AM
Now I guess you have to wonder if they did it on purpose.  One would have to assume, since they haven't changed it. 

I don't think there is a single thing to wonder about it. Tebow is such a circus, and the entire media is focused around him when it comes to the Jets. It was very much intended.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 05, 2012, 08:40:57 AM
Har (http://twitter.com/FauxJohnMadden)........


Quote
Faux John Madden ‏@FauxJohnMadden
BREAKING: With NFL season kicking off tonight.. the Browns, Rams and Dolphins have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs.

 :heart: :heart: :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 05, 2012, 09:22:22 AM
Har (http://twitter.com/FauxJohnMadden)........


Quote
Faux John Madden ‏@FauxJohnMadden
BREAKING: With NFL season kicking off tonight.. the Browns, Rams and Dolphins have been mathematically eliminated from the playoffs.

 :heart: :heart: :heart:

Sigh...  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 05, 2012, 12:42:51 PM
God, it is just going to be a sad, sad fucking season in Miami. I can't see anything positive about that team. At BEST, you can hope that your first round draft QB doesn't shoot his own dick off with a shaky O line and no one but Reggie Bush to throw to. At worst... see the first 6 games from last year.

Faux John Madden also forgot the Jags, who have GABBERT!!!!! and a Maurice Jones-Drew who missed all of training camp and likely won't be up to snuff until mid-season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 05, 2012, 12:46:33 PM
God, it is just going to be a sad, sad fucking season in Miami. I can't see anything positive about that team. At BEST, you can hope that your first round draft QB doesn't shoot his own dick off with a shaky O line and no one but Reggie Bush to throw to. At worst... see the first 6 games from last year.

Faux John Madden also forgot the Jags, who have GABBERT!!!!! and a Maurice Jones-Drew who missed all of training camp and likely won't be up to snuff until mid-season.

Yes, but counter argument to that MJD thing... at least he is not hurt. Pre-season is just an experience that veterans should turn their backs on. If you are fighting for a roster spot, have at it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 05, 2012, 12:50:48 PM
It isn't the pre-season games that matter, it is the training camp and all the conditioning work to get rid of the extra off-season fat, etc., that matters.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on September 05, 2012, 01:05:44 PM
Yes, but counter argument to that MJD thing... at least he is not hurt. Pre-season is just an experience that veterans should turn their backs on. If you are fighting for a roster spot, have at it.

The counter-counter argument to that: Chris Johnson last year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 05, 2012, 01:57:55 PM
So who are you picking tonight?  I figure the Giants will win, but in an ugly game.  Final score:  Giants 16, Cowpokes 12.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 05, 2012, 02:16:18 PM
Giants and Cowboys is ALWAYS a high scoring game. I'd put it more in the 37-34 category.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 05, 2012, 02:34:44 PM
Giants and Cowboys is ALWAYS a high scoring game. I'd put it more in the 37-34 category.

Giants 38, Cowboys 17.

I predict a laugher when the Cowboys find out they have nobody to throw to yet that's healthy.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 05, 2012, 03:58:33 PM
3-1 that Witten's spleen crawls out of his asshole midway through the 2nd quarter.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on September 05, 2012, 05:00:35 PM
ARE YOU REASONABLY PREPARED FOR SOME FOOTBALL?!

Oh NFL, how I've missed you... :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 05, 2012, 05:02:14 PM
Giants and Cowboys is ALWAYS a high scoring game. I'd put it more in the 37-34 category.

That's not much of a prediction......


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 05, 2012, 06:03:25 PM
3-1 that Witten's spleen crawls out of his asshole midway through the 2nd quarter.

For the love of god and and that is holy... MY ANUS IS BLEEDING!!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 05, 2012, 06:16:30 PM
A ruptured or lacerated spleen is nothing to fuck with. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 05, 2012, 06:41:29 PM
A ruptured or lacerated spleen is nothing to fuck with. 

No, which makes his playing even more of a derpy decision. First game of the season... you can skip it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on September 05, 2012, 07:11:03 PM
He's from Carter County, they INVENTED derp there.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 05, 2012, 08:33:22 PM
How bout dem Cowboys?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 05, 2012, 08:45:51 PM
I'm actually a bit surprised since the first half was sure a whole lot of Romo being Romo.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 05, 2012, 08:48:49 PM
Injuries in the secondary for the Giants basically decided that game. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on September 06, 2012, 12:57:20 AM
TIME TO FIRE COUGHLIN


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 06, 2012, 04:37:54 AM
TIME TO FIRE COUGHLIN

 :why_so_serious:

Cowboys looked legitimately good though.  Better than I've seen in a while.  It is going to be a tough division this year, even more so than usual.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 06, 2012, 07:19:44 AM
So is Cleveland happy to see Art Modell dead today?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 06, 2012, 08:18:03 AM
Motherfucking Cowboys.

The Giants defense just basically took the second half off. Of course, having a fifth string cornerback out there was a SERIOUSLY big contributing factor, but not being able to stop the run after halftime certainly didn't help. Arm tackling, over pursuit, and just plain missing coverage killed that team. How the fuck does a #3 receiver no one has ever heard of come out of nowhere to shit all over a top-rated defense? Apparently, because that top-rated defense can't cover a lame dog without a pass rush. What's worse is the pass rush got fucked by not being able to contain on the edge. The ends were rushing inside, Romo ducks and moves outside and suddenly they can't catch him.

And what the fuck Victor Cruz? Three drops? Did we finally see the real Victor Cruz show up? Eli had at least 4 maybe 6 drops that would have been first downs or at least significant gains. And holy shit the running game went NOWHERE. Yeah, let's let Brandon Jacobs go and put it all on Ahmad Bradshaw, who can't stay healthy in a real 2-back system, and a rookie with a history of fumbling problems. Not that Jacobs was any great loss but they could have at least have signed somebody like Ryan Grant to provide some veteran presence behind Bradshaw.

I'm mostly mad because I hate the Cowboys and Eli is my QB on both fantasy teams. Motherfucker.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 06, 2012, 08:20:05 AM
So is Cleveland happy to see Art Modell dead today?

Do we get a team that is at least mildly competitive? No?

Then no... don't give a shit.  :oh_i_see:

Now if this broke whatever the fuck curse is hanging over the Browns... then yeah. But that is TBD.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 06, 2012, 08:27:32 AM
I'm mostly mad because I hate the Cowboys and Eli is my QB on both fantasy teams. Motherfucker.

(http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2012/0905/ny_a_manning_b20_600.jpg)

 :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on September 06, 2012, 09:25:01 AM
Wookit dat widdle puppy, d'awwww.

Eli's one of my QBs too (he's basically my team mascot), but our little FFB league is so teeny we get to start TWO quarterbacks. So hopefully Drew Brees has a good week.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on September 06, 2012, 09:45:21 AM
I'm mostly mad because I hate the Cowboys and Eli is my QB on both fantasy teams. Motherfucker.

 :why_so_serious:

Eli's ability to win close games in a pinch is not a good indicator if his fantasy value.  Plus, he always looks rough early in the season.  Even so, I have him as one of 2 QBs in another league as well because he was available in the mid rounds.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 06, 2012, 12:28:57 PM
Sjofn is neglecting to tell you her OTHER QB.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 06, 2012, 02:10:59 PM
I suspect I'll be making the Eli face often this season.

EDIT: Also, was it just me, or did those replacement refs miss at least 2 or 3 holding calls on the offensive lines of both teams, as well as at least one really fucking blatant interference call in the end zone?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 06, 2012, 02:19:21 PM
The perception I had from last night's officiating is that it was pretty much normal officiating. Neither side seems to be complaining and I haven't seen any commentary complaining about it either.

But really, if you hadn't said "replacement" in that sentence, it would look EXACTLY like every post ever about any game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 06, 2012, 02:27:47 PM
The NFL isn't stupid. They put the absolute best bunch of refs they had on that game to show everything was fine.

The test will be on Sunday when they can't hide the shitty ones.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on September 06, 2012, 02:30:36 PM
That's exactly what I heard as well, and it was a very smart move.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on September 06, 2012, 04:33:29 PM
The real refs are human too...

"1998 NFL Thanksgiving Day Game: Pittsburgh Steelers vs. Detroit Lions: This controversial call changed the game of football forever … or at least the coin toss. The Steelers and Lions were tied and the game was sent into overtime. The coin was flipped midfield and, according to Steelers RB Jerome Bettis, he called tails. The coin landed tails side up and the referee declared the Lions the winner of the toss.

Confusion erupted. Bettis screamed at officials that the referee had gotten the toss result wrong. Referee Phil Luckett, the official who declared the toss, later told reporters that Bettis had called ''heads-tails'' and Luckett, according to NFL rules, went with the first thing he heard out of Bettis’ mouth. The Lions went on to win in overtime and Steelers fans have never forgotten.

No one will ever know if Bettis said heads or tails first, but the rules regarding the coin toss have been since changed to avoid any further controversy. "

Edit:  Remove tag


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on September 06, 2012, 05:02:42 PM
Sjofn is neglecting to tell you her OTHER QB.

I do enjoy that I have a Manning Monopoly.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 07, 2012, 12:54:23 PM
Wow.

"In a stunning development, players suspended for their roles in the Saints' 2009-2011 Bounty Scandal have had their bans overturned on appeal." (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/240227/shocker-bounty-suspensions-are-overturned)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 07, 2012, 01:22:44 PM
Yeah, just saw that. Totally throws the whole thing up in the air. If the players are off the hook, what about the coaches? You'd think at least Payton, Vitt and Loomis have some options for appeal? Gregg Williams is fucked, but, seriously... fuck that guy.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 07, 2012, 01:25:08 PM
Yeah, just saw that. Totally throws the whole thing up in the air. If the players are off the hook, what about the coaches? You'd think at least Payton, Vitt and Loomis have some options for appeal? Gregg Williams is fucked, but, seriously... fuck that guy.

The coaches aren't part of the CBA, from which this is cascading. Basically, it was ruled that this was a pay-for-performance pool. Because of that, it's up to the system arbitrator to dish out punishment, not Goodell.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 07, 2012, 01:35:14 PM
Also I think probably the coaches get held to a bit of a higher standard here. It is, after all, part of the players' job description to do what coaches tell them to.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 07, 2012, 01:39:17 PM
I fully expect new suspensions to come down, probably shorter, and much more transparency. It doesn't sound like they ruled the players not guilty, but that the situation was handled incorrectly.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on September 07, 2012, 01:46:33 PM
https://twitter.com/JonVilma51/status/244155959625269248


Quote
Jonathan VilmaVerified‏@JonVilma51

 Victory is mine!!!! -stewie griffin
  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 07, 2012, 02:24:25 PM
I never understood why the players were suspended. I understood exactly why the coaches were. It's a management v. employee issue.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 07, 2012, 02:34:08 PM
It's not really a matter of "why", but of "whom". This wasn't an exoneration of charges.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on September 07, 2012, 03:08:12 PM
I fully expect new suspensions to come down, probably shorter, and much more transparency. It doesn't sound like they ruled the players not guilty, but that the situation was handled incorrectly.
Proving intent to injure is going to be tricky.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 09, 2012, 11:13:06 AM
Ugh, Matthew Stafford is having a nightmare game. Detroit looks like dogshit. Ditto for Houston. And Buffalo.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on September 09, 2012, 01:51:39 PM
Lions win ugly.  Once again, the Lions playoff hopes ride on Staffords arm.  Can a brother get a defense?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Triforcer on September 09, 2012, 02:15:21 PM
Goddammit, Browns.  Another fucking season of losing every game 13-10 because we struck out YET AGAIN on QBs, but manage to field a decent defense. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 09, 2012, 02:38:46 PM
Lions win ugly.  Once again, the Lions playoff hopes ride on Staffords arm.  Can a brother get a defense?
Goddammit, Browns.  Another fucking season of losing every game 13-10 because we struck out YET AGAIN on QBs, but manage to field a decent defense. 

So let's merge teams and move to Toledo!  :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on September 09, 2012, 02:57:53 PM
So the Toledo Brions?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on September 09, 2012, 04:26:43 PM
Didn't have access to a TV today really (stuck at work), so I ended up streaming NFL games from Sky Sports.

It's jarring to hear a british announcer announcing American Football.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on September 09, 2012, 04:36:09 PM
I'm having a terrible time finding streams so far, including this past Wednesday.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 09, 2012, 05:00:33 PM
I have absolutely no idea what's going on in the NFL this week. Or football for that matter this week. So many teams that are favored going to absolute shit.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on September 10, 2012, 05:03:31 AM
Ronde Barber's still got it; Bucs looked good.

Also, Broncos looked amazing last night...anyone else thinking the Colts made a mistake?   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on September 10, 2012, 06:21:15 AM
Ronde Barber's still got it; Bucs looked good.

Also, Broncos looked amazing last night...anyone else thinking the Colts made a mistake?   :awesome_for_real:

Manning coming off the sidelines after an hour of watching The Rapist play and popping a TD in downs was awesome.  Glad to see the Pats will have at least one potential contender.  Holy shit did they look good.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 10, 2012, 06:33:09 AM
I can't imagine what the Colts would have had if they kept Manning and let him start in front of Luck.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 10, 2012, 06:44:54 AM
Ronde Barber's still got it; Bucs looked good.

Also, Broncos looked amazing last night...anyone else thinking the Colts made a mistake?   :awesome_for_real:

I don't think the Colts made a mistake. They are rebuilding and I doubt Manning would have survived behind that patchwork line they have now. At least Luck can endure a year or two before the Colts ramp back up.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_DumkzEnlw

Might be the only highlight all season, but I think that one was for Jimmy Brown.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 10, 2012, 07:17:11 AM
Yah, Peyton was ridiculous last night and doesn't look to have lost a step. 

Bonus Peyton Gif


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on September 10, 2012, 07:19:28 AM
Brandon Marshall and Matt Forte looked pretty awesome last night I thought. Jeffries and Bush too. The Bears might actually have an offense this season!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 10, 2012, 07:23:52 AM
Yah, Peyton was ridiculous last night and doesn't look to have lost a step. 

I was laughing out loud watching him dissect the Pittsburgh defense with the no huddle.  Even with the loss of velocity on his passes, he still has a level of field vision that is unmatched.  It's obvious that Peyton knows the X's and O's better than nearly every NFL player to date.  The guy is a study of how knowing the details of the game can positively affect your ability on the field. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 10, 2012, 07:37:16 AM
Yah, Peyton was ridiculous last night and doesn't look to have lost a step.  

Bonus Peyton Gif


The point that he started having fun made me realize that us Broncos fans are in for one helluva season. The three straight sacks at the end had me giddy as well. <3 Von Miller.

Yah, Peyton was ridiculous last night and doesn't look to have lost a step. 

I was laughing out loud watching him dissect the Pittsburgh defense with the no huddle.  Even with the loss of velocity on his passes, he still has a level of field vision that is unmatched.  It's obvious that Peyton knows the X's and O's better than nearly every NFL player to date.  The guy is a study of how knowing the details of the game can positively affect your ability on the field. 

The proof was when he was toying with Troy Polamalu.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on September 10, 2012, 07:44:20 AM
Yah, Peyton was ridiculous last night and doesn't look to have lost a step. 

I was laughing out loud watching him dissect the Pittsburgh defense with the no huddle.  Even with the loss of velocity on his passes, he still has a level of field vision that is unmatched.  It's obvious that Peyton knows the X's and O's better than nearly every NFL player to date.  The guy is a study of how knowing the details of the game can make you one of the greatest quarterbacks of all time

FIFY

Although much credit should be given to McGahee.  Was running with a purpose last night.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 10, 2012, 08:01:38 AM
Yah, Peyton was ridiculous last night and doesn't look to have lost a step. 

I was laughing out loud watching him dissect the Pittsburgh defense with the no huddle.  Even with the loss of velocity on his passes, he still has a level of field vision that is unmatched.  It's obvious that Peyton knows the X's and O's better than nearly every NFL player to date.  The guy is a study of how knowing the details of the game can positively affect your ability on the field. 

My friend and I were both chuckling that he does better in the no-huddle because he doesn't have to listen to the shitty Broncos offensive coordinator. He just calls in his own plays. We're betting that at least once every single game, Peyton points to his helmet mic getting suddenly "disconnected" and he just does his own thing.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on September 10, 2012, 08:14:15 AM
Yah, Peyton was ridiculous last night and doesn't look to have lost a step.  

I was laughing out loud watching him dissect the Pittsburgh defense with the no huddle.  Even with the loss of velocity on his passes, he still has a level of field vision that is unmatched.  It's obvious that Peyton knows the X's and O's better than nearly every NFL player to date.  The guy is a study of how knowing the details of the game can positively affect your ability on the field.  

I'd hold off on the accolades for Manning just yet.

That Steeler defense is a sorry lot, even looking more pathetic than the bunch that got chewed up by Tim Tebow in the playoffs last year. No pass rush (their down lineman are now old and feeble), shoddy tackling (which even in down Steeler D years has always been a plus), poor man to man coverage, etc.…  …even when sending 7-8+, Manning still had plentiful time to setup and throw -- the only time they sacked him was on unusual blitz schemes, that the Broncos eventually adjusted for.

Tebow, 316 YD, 2 TD, 15 YPA
Manning, 253 YD, 2 TD, 9.7 YPA

And Polamalu, since getting abused by Rodgers in the SB loss to the Packers, outside of a few big plays at line of scrimmage, has been subpar, at least on pass defense.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 10, 2012, 08:34:05 AM
One of your examples how bad the Steelers was was about how the Broncos adjusted to the scheme... but Manning/Broncos don't have any reason to have accolades?

Seriously. Go back and look at that tape, especially when it comes to A) That the broncos adjusted for the scheme, and B) Manning's signal calling, picking up on blitzes and adjusting them and eating them up, and making Polamalu look foolish.

Sure, Steelers were missing some individuals, but to say that Manning had no reason to have an accolades for how he played is disingenuous at best.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 10, 2012, 08:44:35 AM
We'll see how he does against the Falcons on the road. Falcons have a good offense, but I'm not sold on their new defensive scheme at all.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 10, 2012, 08:54:19 AM
We'll see how he does against the Falcons on the road. Falcons have a good offense, but I'm not sold on their new defensive scheme at all.

It'll be a good test for both teams, given the complete shitstorm that is the Chiefs this season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 10, 2012, 09:12:34 AM
This Sunday's theme should be "Shitty Refs and the Cornerbacks Who Love Them Long Time."

Seriously, fuck me the officiating was bad yesterday. Now, it's usually bad so this is nothing new. However, the badness this time was one of complete and utter inconsistency. We're used to the "I just breathed on his arm and got a pass interference call against me" that the NFL has mandated over the last 5 years. Unfortunately, the replacement refs weren't - which is why there were an absolute SHITTON of interceptions yesterday. Receivers (and in some cases cornerbacks) were getting MUGGED yesterday without a flag. In a similar vein, offensive linemen had a field day. Every game I watched, there was at least one or two blatant clothesline style hold blocks from a left tackle on some charging DE or LB, and not a flag was thrown. The "illegal block in the back" bullshit call that I so despise (seriously, fuck that rule - take it back to clipping, a below the belt at the knees block is illegal and leave the rest alone) also got a bunch of no calls. Normally, I'd be fine with all these no calls, as it's a bit back to the way it used to be - but I've been so conditioned to expect these calls because of the league's emphasis on them that their absence is really pronounced. And that call at the end of the Arizona/Seattle game with the Hawks getting an extra timeout? That's just fucking egregious and somebody out to lose their job over it. I would suggest Goddell or whoever thought locking out the refs would be a good idea, but we know that won't fucking happen.

The games? Welp, RG III is for-fucking-real. Now, I'm not going to go out on a limb and say that the New Orleans defense was all that good, mind you. But he played well, he had poise, he was accurate and he didn't throw any picks. The game plan for him was fucking brilliant. Start him off with bubble screens and short, high percentage throws to get him in rhythm and get his confidence up. Then gradually start adding on. He ate it up and the Saints never really had much answer for him. Washington's defensive front is also really good. They are going to DESTROY lesser teams front lines. I look forward to them really pancaking Vick.

Speaking of the dog killer, hey look, he just threw another INT. 56 fucking passes? That's crazy. And it was against Cleveland who couldn't muster an offense behind an equally shitty rookie QB with no one to throw to. It's going to be a LONG YEAR in Cleveland. I expect Colt McCoy might be starting sometime this season, so there's that to look forward to.  :awesome_for_real:

Peyton is back, baby. Yes, Polamalu has always been weak in pass coverage. Tough. He's what you got. I notice he didn't do too much run stopping either. Not that the rest of the Steelers D did all that much stopping either. Manning finally has a decent running game, and yes, he played better when the O coordinator shut the fuck up and let him be awesome. That Broncos defense is better than any defense Peyton has ever had but I knew that already. I think the Steelers are definitely going to be on the decline this year. Their run game is sub par, and the Rapist can't carry that team deep into the playoffs. Their defense is tough but suspect. Good thing they get 2 games against Cleveland and 2 games against Flacco this year.

LOL Arizona - Kevin Kolb shines in the place he shines best - coming in for an injured QB. Controversy incoming!!!!

Matthew Stafford just threw another INT. The Rams. THE RAMS. Say that again over and over and realize you have to play the Bears twice. And speaking of the Bears, I hope the Chicago faithful don't get too excited just yet. They put up monster points against the Colts and Andrew Luck don't play defense. That team has a new head coach, new D coordinator and new defensive scheme that may not be suited to some of their defensive stars like Freeney. I'm not saying the Bears won't be better than last year (how could they not be?) but let's not get overly excited yet. Your defense is still getting old and Cutler is still standing behind that suspect O line.

Green Bay and San Francisco. I see that no one taught the Packers defense how to tackle again this year. And worse, they forgot how to cover anybody. At least three plays in the first half they had busted ass coverage that left a receiver over the middle, no one within 10 yards of him. No turnovers, inability to run the ball and at times inability to CATCH the ball - Packers lose. Luckily, this was against probably the best defense in the country. The Niners D is playing out of its mind. Also, see my rant about the refs and pass interference above - though I should be thankful. Their no call on the illegal block in the back allowed Randall Cobb to score a TD on a punt return. But the tackling... Morgan Burnett ought to have started running his laps after the game and should still be running them. I don't know what the fuck he was thinking trying to back into Frank Gore to force him out of bounds but that ain't how you tackle somebody. Tackling as a whole is becoming a lost art, though, so I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Still, as bad as the refs were, the Packers lost this one all on their own. If the Bears new look offense is really good, it should have a field day against this secondary.

Fuck these games tonight. Talk about a shittastic first MNF lineup.  



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 10, 2012, 10:50:49 AM
The Packers defense, much like the Patriots defense, will be the reason they don't win a title this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 10, 2012, 10:54:52 AM
I would tend to agree with you unless I see some improvement.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on September 10, 2012, 11:47:08 AM
I'm not saying the Bears won't be better than last year (how could they not be?) but let's not get overly excited yet. Your defense is still getting old and Cutler is still standing behind that suspect O line.

Did you just forget about the first 10 games of the season for the Bears, you know, the ones before Forte and Cutler got injured where they were a strong 7 and 3? That actually will be a tough act to follow. The remaining 6 games of last season was awful and it's damn near impossible to not be better than that. Yes, the defense is getting old but they're still very good in a working system. There are some things to be excited about though. The offense no longer has to listen to Martz and is much more balanced as a result, which will cause troubles down the line for defenses, especially now that Cutler has one true #1 WR and another up and coming, not to mention two halfbacks who could easily be a feature back for most teams. The O-line is weak though, but with faster delivery and better targets it will appear better than it is, but it will usually get the job done. Still lots to improve on but it's a good start.

Optimistic and excited is good for Bears fans right now because it's deserved. Being realistic, though, is realizing that Chi will be taking the #5 seed in the NFC while probably ending up 1 game behind GB who will be fighting for the #1. It will be possible to take that top seed from them, but Chi is still the underdog in that competition.


Edit- agree wit the rest, though I always enjoy watching Bal regardless of who they play


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 10, 2012, 12:16:42 PM
It is funny watching Niners fans who are unable to come to grips with Alex Smith being good. I have a friend who is going through all kinds of contortions after that game trying to give him no credit, after doing it all last season as well. This next game is the one where it all falls apart, I swear!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 10, 2012, 01:41:30 PM
Alex Smith is going to be good enough so long as he can keep the INT's down. That's always been the big killer with him. He's never going to light up the stadium, never going to be elite, but he doesn't have to be so long as they can run the ball and play good defense. I'd say he's Dilfer Mk2 but he's better than that.

As for Chicago fighting for the #5 spot, I could easily see them wining the division with Green Bay and Detroit scrapping it out over that #5 spot. Green Bay's defense is just so damn suspect. Detroit has a worse secondary with a better pass rush. The key to the Bears will be depth and injuries. If their defense can stay relatively healthy, they can win that division.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on September 10, 2012, 01:45:27 PM
Alex Smith is going to be good enough so long as he can keep the INT's down. That's always been the big killer with him.
He set the new Niners record for consecutive passe completions without an INT with 185. Steve Young had the record at 184.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on September 10, 2012, 03:08:28 PM
As a Bears fan, I am practically salivating for Thursday night.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on September 10, 2012, 05:09:01 PM
Alex Smith is going to be good enough so long as he can keep the INT's down. That's always been the big killer with him.
He set the new Niners record for consecutive passe completions without an INT with 185. Steve Young had the record at 184.

HALL OF FAME, HERE HE COMES  :why_so_serious:


I lost my FFB match up this week. I didn't start Peyton because I wanted to see if his head got knocked off in the first week or not. As it did not, I think I will be benching Eli in favor of Peyton (we get to start two QBs, because our league is tiny, and my other one is Brees). I just know he'll sense it and feel sad and not even know why.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 10, 2012, 08:00:30 PM
He'll probably realize the curse is over and unleash the fury.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on September 10, 2012, 08:33:48 PM
Hey, he was totally on my team last year too.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Johny Cee on September 11, 2012, 04:48:29 AM
Is anyone else tired of the Harbaughs?  I'm tired of seeing their meatheady faces gabbing on the sideline.

During the Baltimore game, John called a timeout to bitch out the refs for the personal foul call on the hit to the QB.  His player launched head first into the QB and didn't even make the effort to get his arms up like he was pretending to tackle rather that trying to hit as hard as he could.  And then you burn a time out so you can bitch about it?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2012, 06:30:04 AM
Is anyone else tired of the Harbaughs?

No. I think they are probably the best coaching stories in the league. They've taken two franchises and elevated them to new levels, and two struggling QBs that are becoming stronger due to their support.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 11, 2012, 06:50:20 AM

No. I think they are probably the best coaching stories in the league. They've taken two franchises and elevated them to new levels, and two struggling QBs that are becoming stronger due to their support.

Well, Jim - yeah I can agree. John - jury is still out till they win another SB, since that is the pinnacle and they were already there once.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2012, 07:05:07 AM
I think the John story is going to be huge once the Joe Flacco elevation comes into play.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 11, 2012, 07:27:27 AM
Flacco has plenty of time to fuck everything up, as history points out. One game into the season... and this goes for all the teams. The turnaround in San Fran is a great story for sure though.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2012, 07:33:03 AM
I don't think Flacco will fuck it up this season. He's finally able to make throws that only 5 other guys in the league can make. His arm was never in question, just his accuracy and mentality.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 11, 2012, 07:40:26 AM
I don't think Flacco will fuck it up this season. He's finally able to make throws that only 5 other guys in the league can make. His arm was never in question, just his accuracy and mentality.

I think it's been his mentality that is fucking him up all along. That "can't win the big game" thing is going to stick with him. Either Ray Rice or Flacco is going to have to carry this team in a Championship game, and I'd put money on Rice over Flacco for that. I think he's only slightly better than Sanchez - they can both be really good, and then turn around and choke on a chicken bone.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 11, 2012, 08:15:07 AM
The Ravens don't even need Flacco to be that good.  Their defense is damned good.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2012, 08:28:43 AM
Ravens and Niners Super Bowl.

HARBAUGH BOWL!

Make your reservations now. That's my pick.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 11, 2012, 08:30:59 AM
The Ravens don't even need Flacco to be that good.  Their defense is damned good.

You'd think that, but the last two years, it's been Flacco's flaws that have kept them out of the Super Bowl. And this year they are without Suggs, and Lewis and Reed are a year older. I don't see them getting to the Super Bowl if Flacco doesn't take that next step up.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 11, 2012, 09:06:52 AM
The Ravens don't even need Flacco to be that good.  Their defense is damned good.

You'd think that, but the last two years, it's been Flacco's flaws that have kept them out of the Super Bowl. And this year they are without Suggs, and Lewis and Reed are a year older. I don't see them getting to the Super Bowl if Flacco doesn't take that next step up.

It's going to have to be the Flacco and Rice show this year.  The pass rush is non-existent right now with the loss of Suggs which was letting Dalton pick apart their secondary.  The end score may not reflect it, but Dalton was actually having a pretty decent day up until mid-way through the 3rd quarter.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 11, 2012, 10:05:10 AM
The Ravens don't even need Flacco to be that good.  Their defense is damned good.

You'd think that, but the last two years, it's been Flacco's flaws that have kept them out of the Super Bowl. And this year they are without Suggs, and Lewis and Reed are a year older. I don't see them getting to the Super Bowl if Flacco doesn't take that next step up.

A lot of getting to the Superbowl is having your team click together at the right time.  And there's a certain amount of luck involved, I believe.  I still think they will be a contender even if he isn't amazing, but if he is look out. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 11, 2012, 10:08:40 AM
The Ravens don't even need Flacco to be that good.  Their defense is damned good.

You'd think that, but the last two years, it's been Flacco's flaws that have kept them out of the Super Bowl. And this year they are without Suggs, and Lewis and Reed are a year older. I don't see them getting to the Super Bowl if Flacco doesn't take that next step up.

Flacco outplayed Brady in last year's AFC championship game.  He played more than well enough.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 11, 2012, 10:26:50 AM
Pats got to the Super Bowl, Flacco got to watch it on TV. He didn't play well enough.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 11, 2012, 10:28:12 AM
You can't blame the difference in that game on Flacco.  That was a 50/50 game.  You could have tossed a coin to get the winner. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 11, 2012, 10:29:02 AM
That's the same argument that people try to use on me to blame the 49ers not advancing on Alex Smith, who fumbled exactly zero punt returns.  :oh_i_see:

There are dozens of players who could do better in any given game, it is silly to blame the QB every time, especially when he outplays his counterpart.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on September 11, 2012, 10:35:14 AM
The Ravens don't even need Flacco to be that good.  Their defense is damned good.

They were playing the Bengals.  Let's not be hasty.  Will they be a top 10 defense, highly likely, but that opponent is a not a real defensive test.  I thought BGE did a solid job most of the night.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 11, 2012, 10:41:28 AM
Their defense is going to be good.  I'm thinking they'll be damned good. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 11, 2012, 10:41:39 AM
Pats got to the Super Bowl, Flacco got to watch it on TV. He didn't play well enough.

He was 22/36 for ~300 yards, 2 TDs, 1 INT, and threw a perfect game winning pass that was dropped by Lee Evans in the end zone with 20 seconds to go, followed by a missed field goal that he got his team WELL into range for that would've gotten the game to over time.  Could he have played better, sure I guess so, but to say Flacco needs to be better for them to get over the hump is really ignoring the fact that he got them there last year and his team let him down at the critical moment.

Shit, I don't even know why I'm bothering to make this argument, I don't even care about Baltimore or Flacco.  Its a case of this I guess:
 (http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/duty_calls.png)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 11, 2012, 11:13:48 AM
A real elite QB would have won that game.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on September 11, 2012, 11:34:56 AM
Thanks totwo touchdown passes not completing and Cundiff missing a chip shot, a real elite QB did win that game :why_so_serious:

Though I agree, Flacco was good enough last year and so far seems better this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 11, 2012, 11:37:43 AM
Flacco outplayed Brady in last year's AFC championship game.  He played more than well enough.

Brady would have put up 500 yards against the Pats defense last year.  Flacco had the easier time of it... by a long shot.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2012, 12:18:12 PM
For some reason the general populace is obsessed with quarterbacks when it comes to the NFL. So much so that they honestly believe the reason I team isn't successful falls almost exclusively on the quarterback.

There's a simple reality about what it takes to win a championship (with a couple of notable exceptions). You have to have one outstanding half of your game (be it offense or defense), and a passable version of the opposing half. However, when people see an amazing offense, they automatically lose their minds and declare THAT to be the thing that wins. You'll hear silly bullshit like "It's a passing league" or "The QB is the most important position in sports" or "the old saying that defense wins championship is crap."

If you look at the last 10 Super Bowls, you see this trend. You have the Giants, Packers, Saints, Steelers, Giants, Colts, Steelers, Pats, Pats, Bucs. In those you had Offense, Defense, Offense, Defense, Defense, Offense, Defense, Both, Defense, Defense. Overall it's mostly defense. Now people point to QBs because they say you couldn't win without a good QB. To me it seems like those are the same people who made them "good" or "elite" QBs by whether they won the super bowl. So it's sort of self-selecting. For example, most people say Brady, Rodgers, and Brees are elite. What about Stafford? He tossed for over 5,000 yards. Some say, oh he's too young. What they mean is, oh he doesn't have a ring. On the flip side, Eli was 5th in 2011 and has two rings, yet STILL isn't considered elite, even though he threw for more than Rodgers. People will say, oh he throws too many picks. Really? You mean the whole two more than Drew Brees did last year?

When you get down to it. I'll always take the team with an awesome facet to their game that's well-rounded on the other side. That's why I really like Baltimore and SF this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 11, 2012, 12:29:09 PM
For some reason the general populace is obsessed with quarterbacks when it comes to the NFL. So much so that they honestly believe the reason I team isn't successful falls almost exclusively on the quarterback.

There's a simple reality about what it takes to win a championship (with a couple of notable exceptions). You have to have one outstanding half of your game (be it offense or defense), and a passable version of the opposing half. However, when people see an amazing offense, they automatically lose their minds and declare THAT to be the thing that wins. You'll hear silly bullshit like "It's a passing league" or "The QB is the most important position in sports" or "the old saying that defense wins championship is crap."

If you look at the last 10 Super Bowls, you see this trend. You have the Giants, Packers, Saints, Steelers, Giants, Colts, Steelers, Pats, Pats, Bucs. In those you had Offense, Defense, Offense, Defense, Defense, Offense, Defense, Both, Defense, Defense. Overall it's mostly defense. Now people point to QBs because they say you couldn't win without a good QB. To me it seems like those are the same people who made them "good" or "elite" QBs by whether they won the super bowl. So it's sort of self-selecting. For example, most people say Brady, Rodgers, and Brees are elite. What about Stafford? He tossed for over 5,000 yards. Some say, oh he's too young. What they mean is, oh he doesn't have a ring. On the flip side, Eli was 5th in 2011 and has two rings, yet STILL isn't considered elite, even though he threw for more than Rodgers. People will say, oh he throws too many picks. Really? You mean the whole two more than Drew Brees did last year?

When you get down to it. I'll always take the team with an awesome facet to their game that's well-rounded on the other side. That's why I really like Baltimore and SF this year.

What exactly does Baltimore have that is awesome exactly? I'll reserve judgement till game 7-8 when their age begins to show (just like Pittsburgh's...though they'll likely start earlier), but I honestly would like to know what part of Baltimore stands out as awesome.

As for the QB thing being the penultimate position in determining and NFL team's prowess... the Browns are poster children for chasing that dream. Ever searching for that ultimate QB while neglecting the rest of the team around him has proven fairly lucrative.  :why_so_serious:

Who is more elite: Montana, Marino, Elway?  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on September 11, 2012, 12:30:43 PM
I think Marino did the most with the least.  Steve Young's success suggests that Montana had very good support behind him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2012, 12:43:34 PM
What exactly does Baltimore have that is awesome exactly?

Well for starters they scored the most of any team in the NFL this week. Ray Rice is pretty awesome as he went for over 6 yards a carry. Ray Lewis and Ed Reed are still awesome even though they are old. Dennis Pitta, Anquan Boldin, and Torrey Smith are going to provide an awesome core of receiver options. Oh and Haloti Ngata is awesome as a nosetackle. That guy is an absolute BEAST in the middle.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on September 11, 2012, 12:50:09 PM
Eli isn't considered elite because he's Eli.

(http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/files/2012/08/Eli-Manning-3.jpg)

That is not the face of an elite quarterback. <3


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 11, 2012, 01:01:01 PM
Marino blew monkeys.  God he sucked.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 11, 2012, 01:01:29 PM
Steve Young's success suggests that Montana had very good support behind him Steve Young was fucking awesome.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on September 11, 2012, 01:04:50 PM
How awesome could he be if Alex Smith broke one of his records!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on September 11, 2012, 01:07:52 PM
Who is more elite: Montana, Marino, Elway?  :awesome_for_real:
Elway.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 11, 2012, 01:09:53 PM
Marino had the arm, Elway had the guts, and Montana had the vision.  Together they would be a super QB.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on September 11, 2012, 01:10:36 PM
Eli isn't considered elite because he's Eli.

(http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowlny/files/2012/08/Eli-Manning-3.jpg)

That is not the face of an elite quarterback. <3

"ZOMG, is he drinking out of my juice box?"

Seriously, despite Manningface, Eli is an elite QB.  He has another Super Bowl or two still in him.  I'm not a Giants fan, but you have to respect the fact they win when they have to.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 11, 2012, 01:12:01 PM
Elway was the guy.  Marino was awful.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 11, 2012, 02:25:35 PM
Who is more elite: Montana, Marino, Elway?  :awesome_for_real:
Elway.


1-3 in Big Game.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on September 11, 2012, 02:33:30 PM
2 - 3 :awesome_for_real:

Elway carried the team to the first 3 Super Bowls. Those Broncos teams were not that good. The fact that they got blown out in 2 of the 3 Super Bowls just reinforced that. It was only after TD came along and the defense got better and Elway didn't have to try and win it himself yet again did they win a couple.

Montana was on much better teams, except for maybe the first Super Bowl winning team.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on September 11, 2012, 06:39:40 PM
Elway also won what was quite possibly the most closely matched SuperBowl in terms of the quality of the two teams to pick up his first ring.

And Sjofn, Elway's horseface is just as bad as the dopey Eli-face :-p


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on September 11, 2012, 06:53:28 PM
Elway's face is pretty derp too, it's true.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 11, 2012, 07:58:34 PM
(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/17tbi9n16txeljpg/xlarge.jpg)

 :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 12, 2012, 12:09:38 PM
If you look at the last 10 Super Bowls, you see this trend. You have the Giants, Packers, Saints, Steelers, Giants, Colts, Steelers, Pats, Pats, Bucs. In those you had Offense, Defense, Offense, Defense, Defense, Offense, Defense, Both, Defense, Defense. Overall it's mostly defense.

Actually let me chart that.

Giants - I would say the defense was just as important if not more so than the offense for this team. Their pass rush in the Super Bowl decided that as much as Eli. So BOTH.
Packers - One thing forgotten is that the Pack's defense was CRUSHING people that year, especially late. And they found a running game they hadn't had all season. Then they lost both last year. So BOTH.
Saints - Both facets of their game were awesome that year. Their defense, bounties and all was just killing motherfuckers.
Steelers - Defense. Offense was good but not great.
Giants - Defense won them this Super Bowl as well. Eli did well but wasn't GREAT, just good.
Colts - Offense was great, but this was the one year their defense stood out as not just passable, but really really good. Bob Sanders was doing his Polamalu impression and Freeney was a beast.
Steelers - ALL DEFENSE. Pre-RapistBerger had a terrible game on a good year with Bettis bowling people over.
Pats - Defense with an elite QB leading an otherwise mediocre offense.
Pats - Defense with an elite QB leading an otherwise mediocre offense.
Bucs - Defense, but Brad Johnson was actually lights out in that Gruden offense that year. Still not great but good.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 12, 2012, 12:17:00 PM
I disagree with you on the Saints. Their defense was still shitty, bounties or otherwise.

They were 25th in yards allowed that year, and 20th in points per game. They just outscored the shit out of everyone. It's one of the few anomolies I could find where a team was just inept defensively and won a title.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 12, 2012, 12:19:54 PM
The Saints defense was much better in the playoffs than the regular season.  They came up big in the actual superbowl against Manning, as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 12, 2012, 12:26:28 PM
I disagree with you on the Saints. Their defense was still shitty, bounties or otherwise.

They were 25th in yards allowed that year, and 20th in points per game. They just outscored the shit out of everyone. It's one of the few anomolies I could find where a team was just inept defensively and won a title.

Sacks and turnovers is where their defense stood out that year. And as Ghost said, they were killing people in the playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on September 12, 2012, 12:35:00 PM
http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2012-09-05/super-bowl-2012-defense-wins-championships-49ers-stats-picks


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 12, 2012, 12:36:43 PM
http://aol.sportingnews.com/nfl/story/2012-09-05/super-bowl-2012-defense-wins-championships-49ers-stats-picks


Quote
On defense, it appears that pressuring the quarterback and creating turnovers are more important than total points allowed. The past nine champs had the most statistical success in sacks, total takeaways and interceptions.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 12, 2012, 12:40:48 PM
Yep, exactly why a team like the '10 Packers, '11 Giants, '06 Colts, '09 Saints, '08 Steelers were such good teams. They got after the QB and got turnovers.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 12, 2012, 01:00:50 PM
The two sentences directly after the quote I posted:

Quote
Six teams (2011 Giants, 2010 Packers, 2008 Steelers, 2007 Giants, 2005 Steelers, 2004 Patriots, 2003 Patriots) ranked in the top three in the league in sacks. Only one team ranked in the bottom half, the 2006 Colts. (But that Colts team did sack Tom Brady three times in the AFC championship game to finally get past their nemesis.)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 12, 2012, 01:04:52 PM
Well as I've pointed out, the Saints (and also the Colts since the article mentions it) are the two blatantly offensive teams that don't really match up with those metrics.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 12, 2012, 01:15:02 PM
But the Colts and the Saints were spectacular offensive teams.  It really seems to come down to two things:

1.  Your "specialty", i.e. offense or defense, has to be badass

2.  Your lesser talent has to be okay and probably excel at a particular aspect of the game, e.g. special teams, turnovers, whatever. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 12, 2012, 01:19:17 PM
Yeah I said that like a page ago.  :grin:

There's a simple reality about what it takes to win a championship (with a couple of notable exceptions). You have to have one outstanding half of your game (be it offense or defense), and a passable version of the opposing half.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 12, 2012, 01:24:22 PM
Stop agreeing with me, motherfucker.  I'm trying to have an argument here.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on September 13, 2012, 07:07:13 AM
When the Bucs beat the Raiders, this was most certainly the case.  Brad Johnson was in the game to not lose it, not to make plays.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on September 14, 2012, 08:45:47 AM
Well, that was almost unwatchable. I have Cutler in my pool. At the half, I believe he was at negative 4.5 fantasy points. Sad thing is, most of it wasn't his fault.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 14, 2012, 08:56:40 AM
Watching Jay Cutler fail (and whine about it) is one of the great joys of the NFL. God he is a cunt.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on September 14, 2012, 10:29:39 AM
He is indeed the cuntliest.  Or would you say cuntiest?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 14, 2012, 10:56:56 AM
Cuntler, obviously.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 14, 2012, 11:38:16 AM
Watching Jay Cutler fail (and whine about it) is one of the great joys of the NFL. God he is a cunt.

Oh the joy I had last night.

First off, is the Bears offensive line the absolute worst in the NFL? Maybe, though I haven't watched the Rams, Cardinals or Jags yet. Safe to say that they are pretty fucking awful though. Of course, the first sack on Cutler by DJ Smith wasn't the O line's fault, it was Matt Forte. He apparently decided that turning sideways was the proper way to block a rampaging linebacker. He owes Cutler a dinner out of that one. Cutler's INT's were about half his fault, half the fault of an O Line that kept him running for his life all fucking night. No excuse for him being such a cunt as to bump and shove his linemen. Maybe Brady's just as much of a cunt, but Cutler has the doucheface, so you want to punch him before he even opens his mouth. He is a whiny twat, though.

Also, I could watch Brandon Marshall dropping wide open touchdown passes all fucking night. I think halfway through the act of catching, he thought to himself "Have I slapped a bitch today? I don't think I have. Maybe there's a slappable bitch in the stands. What's CuntyMcTwat over there yelling at me about? Oh the football? Fuck it, I'm getting paid anyway. Now about that bitch-slapping... I probably should throw in some choking while I'm at it. I ain't choked a bitch in months."

I feel much better about the Packers D than last week. They showed up, they got INT's, they got sacks in bunches. They actually COVERED people. Granted, it's only the Bears's receivers, but they Marshall only got open a few times all night. Good to see Jerel Worthy and DJ Smith able to pressure the QB, which let Matthews run wild. Next week is Seattle, so they ought to be able to cover that pack, and be able to throw a rookie QB off his game.

What worries me still is the Packers' receivers. Did someone replace all their hands with bricks? I don't think they dropped as many passes in the first 14 games of last season as they did since the playoff loss last year. Just fucking dreadful. It was good to see they committed to the run with Benson and stuck with it, but shit, Rodgers can't do diddly if his guys are dropping 4 and 5 balls a game.

jwiv tweeted me last night to say that the NFL announcers were awful, and yes, they fucking were. From mispronouncing Masthay's name to just not shutting the fuck up to looking at replays and being dead wrong, I wanted to mute them. With a bottle. To the temple.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 14, 2012, 02:33:29 PM
I love Randall Cobb.  You have two players from Kentucky that are really badass in Cobb and Masthay.  Masthay is amazing. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 16, 2012, 02:35:54 PM
Saints and Pats are really proving my point that you can't just rely on a QB to win games. It requires you to have some semblance of a functional defense.

Baltimore's D let them down late. Vick picked them apart when back in the day the Ravens would have locked him down with a lead in the 4th quarter.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 16, 2012, 03:24:46 PM
Go. Seahawks. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 16, 2012, 04:11:25 PM
Seahawks win at home. Whoopdedo. It's not really on Dallas except for the fact they didn't run well at all. That was the difference in the game.

My guess is that Seattle probably beats GB at home as well. Even at their worst, the Seahawks play 10x better in their house than elsewhere. It's like watching entirely different teams.

Then they'll go into a furious spiral of crap on the road, get blown to pieces by NE in their house, and you're looking at a 3-5 team by November.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on September 16, 2012, 05:01:34 PM
Eagles alone in the NFC East at 2-0.  Fuck yeah!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 16, 2012, 05:17:46 PM
Saints and Pats are really proving my point that you can't just rely on a QB to win games. It requires you to have some semblance of a functional defense.

Baltimore's D let them down late. Vick picked them apart when back in the day the Ravens would have locked him down with a lead in the 4th quarter.

Enh - the D wasn't great, but honestly, I don't understand the football universe that Cam Cameron lives in that has 3rd and 1 be consistently a passing down.  And when you know your QB has a rib bruise going into the second half that's affecting his accuracy and mobility, having everything be a slow developing downfield play is just :uhrr:  But really, I had actually turned the game off by the 4th quarter  - it was a clusterfuck and out of control. Multiple and lengthy delays of game just to figure out how to spot the ball were the least of the issues. The refs were clueless and had lost complete control of the situation by about 3 minutes into the 1st quarter and I am shocked that we didn't have a full on brawl.  Between this and the completely horrid NFL Network game on Thursday, I'm increasingly glad I've got meaningful baseball to watch - at least there I know what stupidity I'll be up against (where's the strike zone today, will you fuckers get instant replay already?)



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 16, 2012, 07:14:20 PM
Saints and Pats are really proving my point that you can't just rely on a QB to win games. It requires you to have some semblance of a functional defense.

Baltimore's D let them down late. Vick picked them apart when back in the day the Ravens would have locked him down with a lead in the 4th quarter.

Enh - the D wasn't great, but honestly, I don't understand the football universe that Cam Cameron lives in that has 3rd and 1 be consistently a passing down.  And when you know your QB has a rib bruise going into the second half that's affecting his accuracy and mobility, having everything be a slow developing downfield play is just :uhrr:  But really, I had actually turned the game off by the 4th quarter  - it was a clusterfuck and out of control. Multiple and lengthy delays of game just to figure out how to spot the ball were the least of the issues. The refs were clueless and had lost complete control of the situation by about 3 minutes into the 1st quarter and I am shocked that we didn't have a full on brawl.  Between this and the completely horrid NFL Network game on Thursday, I'm increasingly glad I've got meaningful baseball to watch - at least there I know what stupidity I'll be up against (where's the strike zone today, will you fuckers get instant replay already?)



The refs did make the Eagles/Ravens game pretty atrocious to watch.  I was actually looking forward to the matchup, but ended up watching more of the Pathers/Saints.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 16, 2012, 08:38:10 PM
Barring injury, the 49ers still look like the best team in the NFL to me.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on September 16, 2012, 08:43:46 PM
Ugh Detroit looked terrible. Everywhere.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on September 16, 2012, 08:50:08 PM
It was a good weekend of football :awesome_for_real:

And how about those NFC West teams? :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 16, 2012, 08:54:43 PM
Worst division in the league, am i rite?

=======================


Scab refs are Pac-12 bad.

EDIT: ...in fact, I'll go so far as to say they're Pac-12 basketball refs bad.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on September 16, 2012, 10:26:58 PM
Yah, they missed a lot of really obvious stuff.  It's hard to watch.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 17, 2012, 01:56:08 AM
Seahawks win at home. Whoopdedo. It's not really on Dallas except for the fact they didn't run well at all. That was the difference in the game.

My guess is that Seattle probably beats GB at home as well. Even at their worst, the Seahawks play 10x better in their house than elsewhere. It's like watching entirely different teams.

Then they'll go into a furious spiral of crap on the road, get blown to pieces by NE in their house, and you're looking at a 3-5 team by November.

I should hedge this post by repeating that I am a Seahawks fan, and have also demonstrably shown my hate for Dallas in this very thread in the past.  So that said, I lolled at your post.  The reason it is "on Dallas" is because it shows exactly what is wrong with them.  On any given Sunday, it is impossible to guess which Dallas team will show up.  In other words, despite having a better roster of players than average, they seem to be completely unpredictable. 

Also, while the Seahawks have their own issues to be sure, there are certain teams they have had these strange rivalries with....not really ones that the media talks about, but they are there nonetheless.  Dallas is one of them, because of that whole Romo dropping the snap debacle.  He has never gotten that out of his head (and Seattle knows it).  I thought he got his redemption last season, but apparently not.  Despite possibly being a better team than Seattle, I definitely give the Hawks the psychological edge in that matchup, especially at home.  I suppose every team in the NFL has these kinds weird rivalries were they just seem to play a team or even a whole division better than the others.  For Seattle, they seem to really get up for games against NFC East teams. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2012, 06:32:35 AM
I disagree about Dallas being unpredictable. I think for the most part they are very predictable. For the most part, Dallas is pretty shitty on the road outside of the division. They'll play teams close at times, but their record on the road outside the NFC East over the last 3 seasons? 7-9.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 17, 2012, 06:41:57 AM
It was just a shitty performance by Dallas.  They should be able to win that game. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2012, 07:16:17 AM
I agree with the first part, Dallas was shitty at running the ball and special teams. My god, the special teams was wretched.

As for the second part, I'm not so sure. Seattle gets almost 70% of it's wins at home over the last 3 seasons, and they sport a winning record at home despite being 19-29 in that stretch.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 17, 2012, 07:35:46 AM
Dallas, with the talent on the roster, should be one of the top 4 or 5 teams in the league.  I would expect them to be a mostly average Seattle team regardless of the fact that the Seahawks play better at home.  Or at least keep the game somewhat fucking competitive


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2012, 07:52:00 AM
I think that's just you misinterpreting the matchup. The NFL isn't just about talent. Everyone is talented. They had to be talented just to make a roster slot. It's about matchups, schemes, and timing. I don't, for example, think the Giants are more talented than the Patriots across the board. I think they have huge advantages in their X's and O's matchups. They can do the things that makes the talented people on the Patriots uncomfortable, while they can't do it against a team like the Skins (a team they ARE more talented than).

I mean look at the Baltimore game last season. You have a Ravens team that was 3 points from the Super Bowl. They were immensely talented. They were 6-2 heading into Seattle against a 2-6 team, and they LOST. Why? Because Seattle absolutely destroys the run at home. They held Ray Rice to 27 yards. Nobody else did that all season. It was a matchup thing, and they had the scheme to beat what the Ravens wanted to do that day.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on September 17, 2012, 08:07:21 AM
And the Ravens failed to adjust.  That is a coaching failure.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 17, 2012, 08:41:49 AM
And the Ravens failed to adjust.  That is a coaching failure.

Or a failure of the personell to give a shit, which appears to be a large part of the Cowboys' failure.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2012, 08:44:00 AM
Or a failure of the personell to give a shit, which appears to be a large part of the Cowboys' failure.

Based on what exactly? It's week TWO. If they are 4-7 in Week 11 and look lackluster, fine, but you're being ridiculous.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 17, 2012, 08:48:21 AM
Would you expect anything else when we're discussing a team I loathe?   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 17, 2012, 09:30:30 AM
Barring injury, the 49ers still look like the best team in the NFL to me.

Yes. Alex Smith is not only a competent QB, he might actually be good - especially when he's playing on a team that doesn't force him to be the main man. He'll never be a Brady, Rodgers, or a Manning (either one) but so long as Frank Gore still has two legs and the defense is THAT GOOD, he can win them a Super Bowl. It just took the right coach and the right talent around him to get there. Detroit, OTOH, is fucked up right now. Matthew Stafford does not look comfortable throwing the ball. It didn't help that they blanketed the shit out of Calvin Johnson in this game, but still, this is a 5000 yard QB last year and he doesn't look like it through 2 games. 4 INT's? He's never been low on the INT total but he hasn't been that bad. Especially when you consider he threw 3 of those against the goddamn Rams. The big takeaway though is that the 49ers defense is fucking incredibly good. Like 2001 Ravens Super Bowl team good.

Oh Saints - I'm glad I didn't watch this game. Their defense does indeed appear to be dogshit and their offense is all over the place.

Both Mark Sanchez and Joe Flacco showed up as their real selves today. Well, they showed up as the Hyde part of their Jekyll and Hyde selves. These two really are hot and cold QB's, and it's why I think neither of them will make the Super Bowl without some serious help. The Jets showed why I think they are destined to be an 8-8 team. Their wideouts are shit. I don't think any of their wide receivers caught a pass after the 1st quarter (at the very least they didn't in the 2nd and 3rd quarters). Their running game isn't strong enough to carry the team, and Greene is too inconsistent to be that feature back Ryan wants him to be. What's behind him isn't better. Santonio Holmes is inconsistent. The Steelers however, aren't much better, despite the big margin. Their running game is also pretty weak, and Todd Haley's offensive system is showing why he's back to being an O coordinator instead of the KC head coach. The Steelers defense also still doesn't look that convincing to me but that's likely because I don't think the Jets are as good as they played against Buffalo last week.

The Redskins defense is better than they've shown, or maybe the Rams are better than anyone thinks they should be. Losing that game because one dolt of a wide receiver can't control his temper is really shitty. Also, either RGIII is the real deal, or both the Rams and the Saints have TERRIBLE defenses. Their next two opponents (Cincy and Tampa) are supposed to have better defenses but Tampa gave up 25 in the second half to a Giants team with no running game, and Cincy let CLEVELAND get 27, so who knows? They still have 2 games against the Cowboys and 2 against the Giants, as well as a game against the Ravens, but otherwise their schedule is not filled with defensive juggernauts.

EDIT: The Cowboys entire roster is overrated - except maybe for their defensive front. No one on that team has shown CONSISTENT performance week in week out other than Ware and Witten. And Witten is getting old as is his spleen. Romo is always on the cusp of being the next Favre but he's been more like early Favre than accomplished Favre. He still has time, though maybe not with the Cowboys.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 17, 2012, 09:34:53 AM
It just took the right coach and the right talent around him to get there.

And a seriously badass defense.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 17, 2012, 07:47:18 PM
Good god the refs are terrible in this Broncos/Falcons game.  Matt Ryan looks like the real deal tonight though. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2012, 07:55:38 PM
I'm having a hard time taking this game seriously. There's been no momentum because the refs can't get out of the way.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 17, 2012, 07:58:45 PM
Did you see that pass interference call on Denver where the guy wasn't even within 3 yards of the guy from the Falcons?

The NFL just needs to get over their shit and get the real refs back on the field.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2012, 08:04:55 PM
Or the 4 mis-spots. Or the time they threw a flag on John Fox and picked it up. Or having to take 2 fucking hours to get through a half. OR NOT KNOWING DEFENSIVE HOLDING ISN'T 10 YARDS IN THE NFL.

I mean if this doesn't do it, nothing will.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Viin on September 17, 2012, 08:18:48 PM
OR NOT KNOWING DEFENSIVE HOLDING ISN'T 10 YARDS IN THE NFL.

Heh, its not? I had no idea.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 17, 2012, 08:39:46 PM
We should sign you up to ref.  You'd fit right in.   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on September 18, 2012, 07:46:36 AM
The thing that drives me crazy is I'm going on six years refereeing rec football and *I* know the fucking rules better than them.

God forbid of something crazy like first touching happens.

/soapboxoff

I will say pressure can make even good officials stumble every now and then.  I've choked up a time or two when I knew the rule but wasn't able to articulate it quickly.

That being said, I'd like to see the TB game replayed with refs that weren't miserable.  The no call on the blatant helmet to helmet on Vincent Jackson was unreal and the reversal of the Williams catch when he braces himself for a hit was just insane.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 18, 2012, 07:53:01 AM
OR NOT KNOWING DEFENSIVE HOLDING ISN'T 10 YARDS IN THE NFL.

Heh, its not? I had no idea.

It's 5 yards and an automatic first down.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 18, 2012, 07:55:36 AM
The thing that drives me crazy is I'm going on six years refereeing rec football and *I* know the fucking rules better than them.

God forbid of something crazy like first touching happens.

/soapboxoff

I will say pressure can make even good officials stumble every now and then.  I've choked up a time or two when I knew the rule but wasn't able to articulate it quickly.

That being said, I'd like to see the TB game replayed with refs that weren't miserable.  The no call on the blatant helmet to helmet on Vincent Jackson was unreal and the reversal of the Williams catch when he braces himself for a hit was just insane.

More telling is the players and coaches manipulating the game for their benefit. Win the game on the field, not debating with the officials. Integrity has to come first, and right now... that is THE flashpoint. If I am a coach and see that all I have to do is debate a call and use the official to pick up the flag or throw one, then the rules become arbitrary.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 18, 2012, 07:58:04 AM
Yeah, the refs have been quick to succumb to complaining/whining by the players.  It's rather pathetic.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 18, 2012, 08:22:13 AM
I can't watch this product.

I turned off the game after the opening of the second half because it was so stupid. There's a reason the NFL standings are so bizarre right now, and it has very little to do with the play on the field. Anybody with terrible corners and offensive lines are winning games because holds are going completely uncalled. Anybody who lacks large receivers and TE's is getting murdered. Speed offenses are getting held up by slow calls and reversals and reviews.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on September 18, 2012, 08:51:58 AM
I can't watch this product.

I turned off the game after the opening of the second half because it was so stupid. There's a reason the NFL standings are so bizarre right now, and it has very little to do with the play on the field. Anybody with terrible corners and offensive lines are winning games because holds are going completely uncalled. Anybody who lacks large receivers and TE's is getting murdered. Speed offenses are getting held up by slow calls and reversals and reviews.

It not just that -- the ref huddle-ups after every other play. The auto-reviews of every scoring play and turnover (yes I know it is theoretically a sound notion, but the NFL overlords need to make it a snappier process). The touchbacks and extended commercial breaks (now so evident that I do not subscribe to DirecTV NFL package).

I tuned in to watch the Steelers at 1:30PM and there was 20 minutes later that I got to see the doubleheader game -- as the preceding game, without OT, went for 3:45. Simply ridiculous. The Steeler v. Jet game 1st quarter was almost expired.

Even the regular refs are plagued with inconsistency. Touching Brady or Manning after they release the ball is almost an automatic roughing call but it's not called so much on the rest of the NFL QB field. Receivers and defensive backs jockey all along the route, but it rare that interference/holding is called.

And the helmet hitting is going to spoil some good games as if it is called as it happens, it going to happen a lot, even when a defensive player has no intent whatsoever to plant a helmet hit. It just a consequence of the speed of the game that being agressive and trying to make a play is going to result in helmet application on some occasions, no matter the caution (and if too much restraint is employed, that diminished agression is certainly going to mean a much less effective defense).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 18, 2012, 08:54:21 AM
Yeah, when you're playing with that intensity and at that speed there will be unavoidable issues like helmet-to-helmets and facemasks.

After watching last night's game I think I'm probably not going to watch any more until the real refs come back.  It's just too painful to sit through.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on September 18, 2012, 09:02:50 AM
And the helmet hitting is going to spoil some good games as if it is called as it happens, it going to happen a lot, even when a defensive player has no intent whatsoever to plant a helmet hit. It just a consequence of the speed of the game that being agressive and trying to make a play is going to result in helmet application on some occasions, no matter the caution (and if too much restraint is employed, that diminished agression is certainly going to mean a much less effective defense).

I am shocked that you believe this true.  There is a strike zone, if you will, for hits.  The speed of the game doesn't factor into this.  Go watch the helmet to helmets that incur fines from the league.  Watch the hit on Sunday on Vincent Jackson.  It's so blatant and intentional that Troy Aikman and Joe Buck practically shit themselves.  Watch the hits from James Harrison.  They are clearly leading with the helmet.

Look, you lead with the shoulder and helmets knock together?  Speed of the game and all that.  But, a less effective defense?  If so, you're a dirty team looking to take someone out of a game. We're talking concussions and permanent life-altering events here.   



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 18, 2012, 09:05:14 AM
A lot of why I enjoy the NFL is the that games feature faster players with better schemes going against tougher defenses. I also enjoy betting on the games that don't have a team I regularly watch so I have some interest in the outcome. I can't do either of those things with the reffing situation right now, which means I'm done watching until it gets resolved.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on September 18, 2012, 09:22:31 AM
Yeah, when you're playing with that intensity and at that speed there will be unavoidable issues like helmet-to-helmets and facemasks.

Facemasks sure, helmet-to-helmet, no.  Helmet to helmet is only a penalty as described here:

http://nflcommunications.com/2011/12/27/definition-of-a-defenseless-player/

We're talking about defenseless players here, folks.  A hit like that is never unavoidable.  You're lying to yourself if a MLB or S coming over the middle doesn't think SportsCenter when a WR goes over the middle.  And, to be completely honest, they should.  Because, if they make a legal form tackle, they can really lay a good lick on a guy. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 18, 2012, 10:14:12 AM
I've seen several called recently that weren't "defenseless players". 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on September 18, 2012, 10:14:54 AM
And the helmet hitting is going to spoil some good games as if it is called as it happens, it going to happen a lot, even when a defensive player has no intent whatsoever to plant a helmet hit. It just a consequence of the speed of the game that being agressive and trying to make a play is going to result in helmet application on some occasions, no matter the caution (and if too much restraint is employed, that diminished agression is certainly going to mean a much less effective defense).

I am shocked that you believe this true.  There is a strike zone, if you will, for hits.  The speed of the game doesn't factor into this.  Go watch the helmet to helmets that incur fines from the league.  Watch the hit on Sunday on Vincent Jackson.  It's so blatant and intentional that Troy Aikman and Joe Buck practically shit themselves.  Watch the hits from James Harrison.  They are clearly leading with the helmet.

Look, you lead with the shoulder and helmets knock together?  Speed of the game and all that.  But, a less effective defense?  If so, you're a dirty team looking to take someone out of a game. We're talking concussions and permanent life-altering events here.   

First, have you ever played tackle football?

Second, even it was just helmet on helmet we were referring to, there still would be some inadvertent instances -- the speed of the game is such that a defensive player can be moving rapidly to make a play and, not on intention, still bang helmet on helmet because the receiver/ball carrier was situated at a fortuitous vertical mark. But that not the bulk of what I was alluding to -- any helmet to "defenseless" player is being called (not every hit, but this is part of my point -- it subjective, in that if the offensive player elicits a reaction). It impossible not to have helmet impact, given the speed of the game, and the gear players don.  Without ability of inhuman level of intuition, impossible to predict how an offensive player will swerve and turn, and thus there will always be probability of a helment hit on a tender part of the body.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 18, 2012, 10:17:28 AM
The refs totally utterly fucked that game last night. It's not the first game they've done that to this season, but it was certainly one of the most obvious and high profile. As I tweeted last night, the NFL ought to be fucking ashamed of this shit. I complain about the regular refs - and I think I have valid complaints about them as well as the current interpretation of the rules - but fuck me, this is goddamn amateur hour. In a sport with an annual revenue of almost TEN BILLION FUCKING DOLLARS, you're going to call in scrub refs because you can't agree with the regular refs over a collective bargaining agreement? Is it going to take someone getting injured for the season during one of these cluster fuck dick-waving contests that the refs can't seem to get a grip on before the NFL realizes shit needs to get done? The sports radio tone went from "yeah, they messed up but for the most part it wasn't terrible" after the first week's games to "this is absolutely disgraceful" after this week's games.

I don't blame the replacement refs. They are doing the best they can but they are the JV team getting put up against a Super Bowl champion. They simply can't handle the pressure and the league is giving them no help. It's fucking Keystone Cops out there between missed calls, taking forever just to spot a goddamn ball, to calls that were just out and out WRONG. The fact that John Fox had to blow a challenge flag on that tipped ball to get the defensive interference call overturned is insane. Plus, it could have meant robbing his team of a legit TD if that Thomas pass in the endzone had been outside of 2 minutes and thus only reviewable by challenge. There's simply no excuse for reffing this bad in a game making this much money.

As for the game, really hard to watch. Manning looked awkward and ordinary for 3 quarters. Denver's defense didn't show up until 3 quarters in as well. The Falcons may be a better team than I initially thought (beating KC is not a major accomplishment). I didn't realize Mike Nolan was their new D coordinator. He's certainly got them looking solid, but he's always been good at setting up tough defenses. Amazingly, Atlanta's offense is still a bit of a concern. They missed opportunities for touchdowns with some short fields in the first half, and though they moved the ball, didn't really put Denver down for the count when they could have. Still, a win's a win. With the Saints shitting the bed, this may well be Atlanta's division to lose.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on September 18, 2012, 10:22:59 AM
As for the game, really hard to watch. Manning looked awkward and ordinary for 3 quarters. Denver's defense didn't show up until 3 quarters in as well. The Falcons may be a better team than I initially thought (beating KC is not a major accomplishment). I didn't realize Mike Nolan was their new D coordinator. He's certainly got them looking solid, but he's always been good at setting up tough defenses. Amazingly, Atlanta's offense is still a bit of a concern. They missed opportunities for touchdowns with some short fields in the first half, and though they moved the ball, didn't really put Denver down for the count when they could have. Still, a win's a win. With the Saints shitting the bed, this may well be Atlanta's division to lose.

Seeing Peyton Manning in a Bronco jersey conjures up images of Joe Namath in a Rams uniform, Franco Harris in a Seahawks jersey, and though it before my time (and the first two examples, I was just a kid), Johnny Unitas in Charger blue…


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 18, 2012, 10:26:21 AM
I agree with your assessment of the officials, Haemish.

Colin Cowherd is still doing his traditional contrarian thing on ESPN Radio, meaning he's saying the refs are fine. Then every single guest he brings on totally disagrees with him. I've yet to hear from one person that we can't tell the difference between questionable calls and the insult to our intelligence that was last night. Fuck you NFL. If the only way you'll stop this shit is for me to stop watching, I'll do it, because the product on the field is pathetic.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 18, 2012, 10:29:43 AM
How does Cowherd still have a job? He is not only clueless, but clueless in a dull, pedestrian way. I can't stand listening to him. Or any nationally syndicated sports radio, honestly. Sports Radio needs to be homegrown- the national stuff is too homogenized to be interesting.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 18, 2012, 10:31:57 AM
As for the game, really hard to watch. Manning looked awkward and ordinary for 3 quarters. Denver's defense didn't show up until 3 quarters in as well. The Falcons may be a better team than I initially thought (beating KC is not a major accomplishment). I didn't realize Mike Nolan was their new D coordinator. He's certainly got them looking solid, but he's always been good at setting up tough defenses. Amazingly, Atlanta's offense is still a bit of a concern. They missed opportunities for touchdowns with some short fields in the first half, and though they moved the ball, didn't really put Denver down for the count when they could have. Still, a win's a win. With the Saints shitting the bed, this may well be Atlanta's division to lose.

Seeing Peyton Manning in a Bronco jersey conjures up images of Joe Namath in a Rams uniform, Franco Harris in a Seahawks jersey, and though it before my time (and the first two examples, I was just a kid), Johnny Unitas in Charger blue…

Joe Montana in a Chiefs uni? or Jerry Rice in Raider black? Favre in a Vikings uni.. I believe they are calling it the twilight uniform.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 18, 2012, 10:35:39 AM
Colin Cowherd is still doing his traditional contrarian thing on ESPN Radio, meaning he's saying the refs are fine.

Cowherd is very rarely right and/or listenable, but for the most part is just a complete and utter douchenozzle of the highest order. I do not understand why he has a radio show. You might as well pair him up with Bayless and have a "The Two Jizz Moppers" radio show.

As for nationally syndicated sports talk, I actually like some of it. Mike and Mike is fun, I like Scott Van Pelt too. I can't listen to the local stuff because it's wall to wall SEC talk with the occasional Saints filler and high school stuff in the middle, and I don't really give much of a shit about college ball.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 18, 2012, 11:05:37 AM
Anybody can be in national sports radio and be successful. Here's the formula:

1 - Find something that the fans traditionally do not like.
2 - Express your love of said thing fans do not like.
3 - Cherry pick stats to support this statement, ignore other stats.
4 - Talk over callers and ask them to provide explicit details, while providing none of your own
5 - PROFIT


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on September 18, 2012, 11:58:49 AM
Look, you lead with the shoulder and helmets knock together?  Speed of the game and all that.  But, a less effective defense?  If so, you're a dirty team looking to take someone out of a game. We're talking concussions and permanent life-altering events here.   

First, have you ever played tackle football?

Second, even it was just helmet on helmet we were referring to, there still would be some inadvertent instances -- the speed of the game is such that a defensive player can be moving rapidly to make a play and, not on intention, still bang helmet on helmet because the receiver/ball carrier was situated at a fortuitous vertical mark.

:oh_i_see:  Apparently reading is hard.  I clearly said this and agreed with you.

But that not the bulk of what I was alluding to -- any helmet to "defenseless" player is being called (not every hit, but this is part of my point -- it subjective, in that if the offensive player elicits a reaction). It impossible not to have helmet impact, given the speed of the game, and the gear players don.  Without ability of inhuman level of intuition, impossible to predict how an offensive player will swerve and turn, and thus there will always be probability of a helment hit on a tender part of the body.

I still reject this argument.  Watch the VJ play, fourth quarter, around the six minute mark.  I see a lot of "helmet impact, given the speed of the game" plays, but this one isn't one.  This is a guy aiming high and smashing a defenseless receiver near the head.  It's so blatant that the announcers are surprised VJ pops right up and are happy he's not injured.  I already posted the rule above, so here's the related video:
http://www.giants101.com/2012/09/17/video-new-york-giants-kenny-phillips-unloads-on-vincent-jackson/

If you think that's good for the NFL then we have a difference of opinion.  If you think this is legal as defined by the current ruleset, you're wrong.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 18, 2012, 12:09:14 PM
I don't like those type of hits for one reason. They aren't tackles. It's the same type of non-wrapping-up bullshit I'd like to get out of the league. It's not fundamental, it's not a shot to the middle of the body and it's not an attempt to take a guy to the ground. It's a guy flying cannonball style at another player. It's stupid, and it's a bad way to tackle.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 18, 2012, 12:20:08 PM
There's a clear difference between a guy spearing someone and bumping helmets in the act of wrapping someone up.  

Addendum-  Sounds like the coaches and players aren't too happy with the ref situation either (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8394294/nfl-coaches-players-fed-fill-refs). 



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on September 18, 2012, 01:05:19 PM
R.I.P. Steve Sabol (http://news.yahoo.com/nfl-films-president-steve-sabol-dies-69-174119670--finance.html)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on September 18, 2012, 01:13:29 PM
I still reject this argument.  Watch the VJ play, fourth quarter, around the six minute mark.  I see a lot of "helmet impact, given the speed of the game" plays, but this one isn't one.  This is a guy aiming high and smashing a defenseless receiver near the head.  It's so blatant that the announcers are surprised VJ pops right up and are happy he's not injured.  I already posted the rule above, so here's the related video:
http://www.giants101.com/2012/09/17/video-new-york-giants-kenny-phillips-unloads-on-vincent-jackson/

Nowhere did I mention a specific play and not going to justify this one. It's not my point, and apology for not making myself more clearer -- point is, helment on body (and even helmet) happens even when the intention is not to play dirty due to game speed. In a theoretical universe, tackles would always be "wrapping" up at consistent collisions but real live play bodies fly and helmet collisions happen. Unless defenders become overly cautious and restrained, which means they will also be far less effective. So, that makes it a crap shoot at times, a key penalty that can decide the game.

But don't take my words for it, listen to any top notch defensive player, that speaks candidly on the matter.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 18, 2012, 01:26:54 PM
R.I.P. Steve Sabol (http://news.yahoo.com/nfl-films-president-steve-sabol-dies-69-174119670--finance.html)


 :heartbreak:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on September 18, 2012, 01:52:22 PM
As I tweeted last night, the NFL ought to be ..

Thank god you're letting us know the when you're tweeting and what you're tweeting.

R.I.P. Steve Sabol (http://news.yahoo.com/nfl-films-president-steve-sabol-dies-69-174119670--finance.html)


RIP.  :( :(


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 18, 2012, 02:54:06 PM
As I tweeted last night, the NFL ought to be ..

Thank god you're letting us know the when you're tweeting and what you're tweeting.

Don't be glib. My tweets are SRS BZNESS.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2012, 11:15:00 AM
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/sports/Vince-Young-Broke-Out-of-NFL-170334706.html

Vince Young's broke. Raise your hand if you DIDN'T see this one coming.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 19, 2012, 11:17:25 AM
Hey, if all rich people were like this trickle down economics might work  :awesome_for_real:

VY is a turd. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 19, 2012, 11:20:35 AM
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/sports/Vince-Young-Broke-Out-of-NFL-170334706.html

Vince Young's broke. Raise your hand if you DIDN'T see this one coming.

Quote
"I would just say that Vince needs a job," said Trey Dolezal, Young's attorney, when asked to give a general assessment of his client's finances.

Good thing he's got a degree... OH.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2012, 11:23:01 AM
This is my favorite part:

Quote
Peoples claims in the countersuit that every decision he made was approved by Keith Young. And he calls Vince Young's unwillingness to accept responsibility "a common occurrence ... as (former Titans coach) Jeff Fisher, (Texas coach) Mack Brown, numerous NFL executives, coaches, teammates, scouts, girlfriends and illegitimate children will attest."

OH SNAP, SON!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on September 19, 2012, 11:26:59 AM
No one else finds these stories sad?  I know we can't save people from themselves, but I'm a little saddened by it.

I legitimately think he has an undiagnosed (or under-realized) mental illness.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2012, 11:30:19 AM
I feel sad for the kids that grow up without a dad because their father refuses to acknowledge them, and their mother uses them as a meal-ticket.

Other than that, no. There are too many success stories in the NFL of people not falling into the trap of their own self-indulgence.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 19, 2012, 11:32:04 AM
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/sports/Vince-Young-Broke-Out-of-NFL-170334706.html

Vince Young's broke. Raise your hand if you DIDN'T see this one coming.

 :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 19, 2012, 11:32:37 AM
I feel sad for the kids that grow up without a dad because their father refuses to acknowledge them, and their mother uses them as a meal-ticket.

Other than that, no. There are too many success stories in the NFL of people not falling into the trap of their own self-indulgence.

Such as this pretty nice story about Kitna.  http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/49057206/


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2012, 11:38:10 AM
Thanks for that story about Kitna, that's very cool and amazing work by a guy who gets it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on September 19, 2012, 11:45:32 AM
Thanks for that story about Kitna, that's very cool and amazing work by a guy who gets it.

Heartwarming stories in the NFL thread?  F13's gone soft!

Always liked Kitna.  Thought he'd have been a good fit for Tampa Bay after Brad Johnson.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 19, 2012, 12:00:36 PM

F13's gone soft!

It's definitely a lot softer than it was 3 years ago.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 19, 2012, 12:11:45 PM
No one else finds these stories sad?  I know we can't save people from themselves, but I'm a little saddened by it.

I legitimately think he has an undiagnosed (or under-realized) mental illness.

I tend to agree with you in general; every once in a while though you do end up with a guy who is just an utter twat. Don't know enough about this guy to know if he qualifies really as I never really paid attention to him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 19, 2012, 12:16:09 PM
Vince Young is an utter twat. 

(http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/002/267/228/vince_young_display_image.jpg?1338255426)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 19, 2012, 12:19:38 PM
So maybe that leaked Wonderlic test result for VY was a bit more accurate than anyone wanted to admit...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 19, 2012, 12:23:29 PM
Men's nipples get tabloid NSFW star cover things now?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 19, 2012, 12:24:57 PM
Men's nipples get tabloid NSFW star cover things now?

I've heard that the actual sight of his nipples will cause women to rob banks and hijack fancy cars. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 20, 2012, 07:37:20 AM
Interesting article (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8400480/flags-replacements-regular-refs-same) on the state of reffing affairs in the NFL on ESPN.

Quote
The perception seems to be flags are flying indiscriminately. And yet:

•  The average number of penalties per game is down from 15.2 to 14.7.

•  On player-safety calls, such as roughing the passer; unnecessary roughness, including hitting defenseless players; and face-mask or horse-collar violations, the calls are nearly even: 75 this year, 74 last.

•  Instant replay reviews are way up, an increase of 16. But the percentage of reversals is way down: 23 this year out of 62 as opposed to 21 of 46 in 2011.

•  Defensive pass interference and illegal contact penalties are up, but only from 48 to 51, surprising because of the hubbub raised on the airwaves about the lack of such calls.

Very interesting.....


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 20, 2012, 07:43:03 AM
that's assuming that those calls are all good calls, which is what the real concern about the officials is/was.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 20, 2012, 07:45:16 AM
that's assuming that those calls are all good calls, which is what the real concern about the officials is/was.

There has been a fairly low level of reversals on calls that have been reviewed and they seem to be reviewing more calls than last year.   :|

And I'm not going to argue that the officiating has been good-  I've seen some stinker calls, but maybe it's not as bad as we think?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 20, 2012, 07:50:48 AM
Those stats are misleading because they don't pass the eye test, or the situational conditions of reffing in these games

1 - The number of penalties is down because they are calling less on the home team. The refs are intimidated. Take a look at judgement penalties (holding, PI, etc) and look at the splits.
2 - Player safety calls are pretty black and white. It's like a false start. The only one that's not is roughing the passer, and that's been pounded by the league that ANYTHING after a second counts.
3 - Replays are way up. Yeah and so is time to make calls. They didn't mention that. Also, reversals are going to be down because there are MANDATORY replays on everything now. Not just coach challenges. Some obvious scoring plays are getting reviewed as a precaution. That's throwing the numbers off.
4 - PI penalties are slightly up. Again, check the splits home/road. Also, consider the fact that players are testing the refs. They are going after players harder, and you can see it on film if you watch the games. It's the substitute teacher mentality in the secondary. They want to see how far they can take it. Also, they assume that these PI calls have any level of consistency. I can assure you after watching some of the major national games, they don't.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 20, 2012, 08:00:14 AM
Actually, if you read the article they did discuss point 3 a little.

Quote
What the fans seem most annoyed with is the lack of pace to games, most notably Monday night's win by the Falcons over the Broncos that dragged on past midnight. That's about the only area where, statistically, the replacements have been far inferior.

Average time of game is about six minutes longer in 2012 than in 2011, and with only one overtime game in the opening two weeks -- same as last year -- extra periods can't be blamed. More likely, the time it takes to properly administrate penalties throughout the game is the cause.

My concern comes from the number of calls that are clearly influenced by players "calling for a flag" or calls that were so blatantly missed that were added into (or not added) into the total.  I saw several flags in Monday's game that should not have been thrown and quite a few that should have been. 

There's also a chance that some of the non-televised games are reffed better and we're just getting the sludge.  Of course you may have the NFL package to see more games and have a better opinion of what is going on overall.  It stands to reason that some of these referees are better than others. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 20, 2012, 08:06:52 AM
My concern comes from the number of calls that are clearly influenced by players "calling for a flag" or calls that were so blatantly missed that were added into (or not added) into the total.  I saw several flags in Monday's game that should not have been thrown and quite a few that should have been. 

There's also a chance that some of the non-televised games are reffed better and we're just getting the sludge.  Of course you may have the NFL package to see more games and have a better opinion of what is going on overall.  It stands to reason that some of these referees are better than others. 

Your first sentence seems to side with the "worse reffing". If a player calls for a flag, and the ref is using that as his reasoning and does it, that's bad. I actually don't that the players are not getting flags just because they asked. The referring has been sloppy due to pacing and not knowing team names, etc. It's just sloppy, and that could just be attributed to nerves and shit.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 20, 2012, 08:08:17 AM
I totalled the penalties last week in all the games.

115 road, 98 home.

54% to 46%, an 8% spread in the favor of the home team. Unshockingly, the home teams won 14 of the 16 games.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 20, 2012, 08:08:55 AM
Oh, I definitely think the reffing is worse.  And I figured Paelos would have a ton of figures to show that it is.  My assumption is that ESPN is trying to keep people watching because they know the problem is there and is effecting viewership.  


I totalled the penalties last week in all the games.

115 road, 98 home.

54% to 46%, an 8% spread in the favor of the home team. Unshockingly, the home teams won 14 of the 16 games.

Do you have the means to compare this to last year? 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 20, 2012, 08:18:57 AM
I do, actually the spread is the same 54% in the prior year. Which sort of shocked me. Home teams only won 11 of the 16 games though.

The difference is that in 2011 with the regular refs in Week 2. It was 97-83, which means that 33 more penalties (18%) were called in Week 2. Also, the numbers of week 2 in 2011 were dramatically skewed by one outlier game, the Cards and Redskins game in which the road Cards were penalized 10 times to the Skins 3. The largest road split in the current year was 4 on the road, 3 at home. In the 2011 season it was 7 on the road, 3 at home.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 20, 2012, 08:26:34 AM
Basically, ESPN is terrible. Shocker.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on September 20, 2012, 08:40:20 AM
Those statistics do not address the "quality" of the calls, merely that they hit the proper "quota"; not that a "quota" is the proper prescription, but that the totals approximate.

OTOH, there is an official huddle-up on just about every other play, and throw in auto-reviews on all turnovers and scoring plays, and that is making for game times of 3.5 hours+. Perhaps the NFL overlords will not chafe at the demands of the regular officials, but if the networks begin bitching about time slots, maybe that will get talks moving.

ESPN, NFL Network, networks carrying NFL games, etc.… have to be cognizant of being too critical. It OK to blast certain players or some coaches, but questioning the edifices of the game itself is a ticket to hosting a sports talk show in Kalamazoo or some other hinterland.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 20, 2012, 09:32:56 AM
that's assuming that those calls are all good calls, which is what the real concern about the officials is/was.

Yeah, it's not the number of calls made that's the problem, it's that the calls being made are often VERY VERY BAD, the blatant calls being missed are even worse, the game is dragging significantly because the refs can't even spot the ball and the consistency of the calls has been all over the road.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on September 20, 2012, 11:54:11 AM
Article is crap.

You just have to watch one game and see that the DB's are just raping wide receivers out there like it's 1982 again.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 20, 2012, 12:01:20 PM
Yeah the calls that aren't being made are the real issue I think. Calvin Johnson threw a totally illegal pick on Detroit's last drive in the 49er game that I have a hard time imagining the regular crews missing. And every game has a few of those.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 20, 2012, 12:16:53 PM
Well, according to those stats you'd have to have about the same number of non-called penalties and shitty penalties because the numbers are similar.  That is entirely possible.  I agree that it doesn't pass the smell test. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 20, 2012, 12:23:23 PM
http://nation.time.com/2012/09/20/nfl-replacement-officials-affecting-vegas-bets/

This is why I'm pissed at the official and the product. It's screwing up my picks!  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 20, 2012, 12:53:22 PM
Well, according to those stats you'd have to have about the same number of non-called penalties and shitty penalties because the numbers are similar.  That is entirely possible.  I agree that it doesn't pass the smell test. 

Yeah, true. And almost certainly there's a bit of confirmation bias going on as well - we expect the reffing to be worse, so we see it being worse in ways that might in reality have been just as bad under the regular refs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on September 20, 2012, 02:22:01 PM
http://nation.time.com/2012/09/20/nfl-replacement-officials-affecting-vegas-bets/

This is why I'm pissed at the official and the product. It's screwing up my picks!  :awesome_for_real:

You may dance around in a top hat, but you sir are a degenerate monkey.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on September 20, 2012, 02:57:22 PM
Some of y'all really don't have a grasp of probability or statistics.

I suspect the replacements are no worse than the regular refs in practise; people are just falling victim to confirmation bias in as much as they expect the replacements to be worse, so they scrutinise questionable calls harder, and hold these up as proof. If we made blind samples of penalty calls from the last five seasons and tested folk I'd willingly bet that people wouldn't be able to discern the replacements from the real deal.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 20, 2012, 03:04:11 PM
We would when they spot the ball.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 20, 2012, 03:06:49 PM
We would when they spot the ball.  :awesome_for_real:

And how.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 20, 2012, 03:37:21 PM
Some of y'all really don't have a grasp of probability or statistics.

I suspect the replacements are no worse than the regular refs in practise; people are just falling victim to confirmation bias in as much as they expect the replacements to be worse, so they scrutinise questionable calls harder, and hold these up as proof. If we made blind samples of penalty calls from the last five seasons and tested folk I'd willingly bet that people wouldn't be able to discern the replacements from the real deal.

You shut your mouth while we're getting all  :mob:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on September 20, 2012, 03:44:15 PM
He just has confirmation bias towards confirmation bias.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 20, 2012, 03:52:40 PM
We would when they spot the ball.  :awesome_for_real:

And how.

This is my biggest problem.  Hell, I've been bitching about refs for years for the calls they make.  Its the fact that there is way too much waiting the hell around for the replacement refs to do shit that is my main problem.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on September 20, 2012, 04:10:32 PM
There's no confirmation bias, it's fucking terrible and hard to watch.  I was willing to give them a break, but it's nearly worse than the hyperbole.  They screw up the obvious and don't even notice the more subtle (if by subtle you mean a guy getting de-cleated on a pick play).

It's like watching a game where every position on the crew is manned by Ed Hochuli.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 20, 2012, 04:46:47 PM
It sounds as though (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8404563/nfl-issues-field-conduct-warning-owners-general-managers-coaches-all-32-teams) the defenses and coaches have definitely tried to capitalize on the referee changes. 


Quote
After watching coaches' behavior with replacement referees last weekend, the league determined it was unacceptable and put everyone on notice.

Asked what would happen if another coach berated another replacement referee this weekend, Anderson said: "If someone were to make that mistake, he would be flagged on the field and he would be hearing from our office in a very firm way."


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 20, 2012, 05:01:07 PM
Some of y'all really don't have a grasp of probability or statistics.

I suspect the replacements are no worse than the regular refs in practise; people are just falling victim to confirmation bias in as much as they expect the replacements to be worse, so they scrutinise questionable calls harder, and hold these up as proof. If we made blind samples of penalty calls from the last five seasons and tested folk I'd willingly bet that people wouldn't be able to discern the replacements from the real deal.

You wouldn't be saying this if you watched the game this Monday Night. They are literally being told the rules by the coaching staff.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 20, 2012, 05:06:04 PM
Was there seriously nobody better they could have gotten for this?  These refs have appeared seriously incompetent to my untrained and biased eye. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 20, 2012, 06:51:28 PM
Was there seriously nobody better they could have gotten for this?  These refs have appeared seriously incompetent to my untrained and biased eye.  

It takes a special breed of human that enjoys being berated by millions of people on live television.  They're hard to find.  

I have to add... I played football for most of my life prior to the age of 22.  ALL of my negative memories associated with playing the game come directly from the fans.  I can't even imagine being a player or official at the NFL level.  Making calls at the speed of the NFL and under the intense pressure of the NFL must be incredibly difficult.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 20, 2012, 07:22:02 PM
Clearly some people enjoy it though.  I know a ton of people that ref something. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 20, 2012, 07:44:53 PM
The way the NFL does it is just strange anyway. I think they're the only league where the officials are just contractors, not full time salaried? It seems like a really strange way to run a top-end professional league.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on September 21, 2012, 05:21:44 AM
I've refereed football and umpired baseball for the last six years as a hobby.  Football officiating is by far the most stressful officiating because every call you make could have game-changing implications.

Baseball's different:  you miss a strike call or blow a timing play?  Odds are each team will have a chance to recover.  Miss a pass interference call that stops a drive and turns the ball over?  Completely different.

That being said, I guarantee they know the rules.  I think they're just hesitating because they're on such a big stage.  I know that even in high school games when a big play just happened and I have to explain it calmly I've choked up a couple times.

I've had run-ins in youth football with big(ger) name players and coaches.  Brad Culpepper in South Tampa and Jon Gruden in North Tampa (although Gruden was four years ago).  Even with 10- to 12-year olds playing flag football, it's intimidating when Chucky's in your face asking about a call (even when you've made the right one).

I can't imagine what that's like for a newly-promoted white hat on Sunday with the coaches, fans, and cameras associated with the NFL.

Edit:  Original post was too stream-of-consciousness for my taste.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 21, 2012, 05:24:24 AM
I agree.  I bet if you sat them down with a pen and paper and tested them, they'd do just fine.  It's the pressure of the stage that's getting to them.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on September 21, 2012, 07:20:05 AM
Great post from PFT regarding the comparison to regular vs official refs found here (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/21/replacement-ref-audit-misses-the-point/). It's in response to the WSJ's "audit" of the refs, but I think it applies to any organization attempting to downplay how poorly the replacements are doing.

The most telling part imo:
Quote
After the first week of games, during which the replacements looked the part, acted the part, and sounded the part, the aftermath resulted in multiple sources telling PFT that the average officiating errors per game exceeded 30.  In contrast, the regular officials had average mistakes in the single digits.


Yes, pressure could be a big part of it - and that sucks for the replacements as they have huge shoes to fill on the largest of stages - but that is even more reason for the NFL to pay the regular refs


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 21, 2012, 08:54:38 AM
Wall Street Journal article in question. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443816804578004613701813182.html)

PFT article in question and in response. (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/21/replacement-ref-audit-misses-the-point/)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on September 21, 2012, 09:20:23 AM
Doh thanks, I had the PFT article linked but was rewording my post and forgot to put it back in.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 21, 2012, 09:48:41 AM
I don't blame the refs for sucking, I blame the NFL for putting them out front and center over what is in essence a few million dollars in pension funds. It isn't like the old refs are asking for things to change, or for MORE MONEY. They are asking that the pensions they agreed to be fucking honored. That's the core issue. Fuck the NFL in its greedy, $9 billion earhole.

EDIT: Forgot to add anything about last night's game. Probably because it was over before the 2nd quarter started. Dear God, did the Panthers' defense look inept, along with their O line. I really like Cam Newton as an athlete but he was overmatched. I noticed that his throws are SO QUICK - once he actually decides where to throw the ball, his arm speed is just crazy. The problem comes with the decision part - he takes longer than he will as he gets more experience, and his choices aren't always good. He shouldn't have thrown so many picks against a weak Giants secondary but he was probably of the "I got to win this myself" mindset after the shittastic way the defense played.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 21, 2012, 12:18:04 PM
EDIT: Forgot to add anything about last night's game. Probably because it was over before the 2nd quarter started. Dear God, did the Panthers' defense look inept, along with their O line. I really like Cam Newton as an athlete but he was overmatched. I noticed that his throws are SO QUICK - once he actually decides where to throw the ball, his arm speed is just crazy. The problem comes with the decision part - he takes longer than he will as he gets more experience, and his choices aren't always good. He shouldn't have thrown so many picks against a weak Giants secondary but he was probably of the "I got to win this myself" mindset after the shittastic way the defense played.

The kick returner was probably thinking the same thing when he tried to force a play on those two kicks, dropping the ball both times.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 21, 2012, 12:25:22 PM
I really like Cam Newton as an athlete but he was overmatched.

More like outnumbered. I keep seeing statements about how great their O-line is but that makes 2 games out of 3 where they've had issues.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 21, 2012, 12:43:21 PM
Yeah, and this game they couldn't blame it on "not having a running game" like against Tampa. They actually were able to run the ball but when it came to passing... all bets were off.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 21, 2012, 12:45:40 PM
Yeah, and this game they couldn't blame it on "not having a running game" like against Tampa. They actually were able to run the ball but when it came to passing... all bets were off.

Cam was trying to run the read-option, and he was fucking up his reads. One of the better radio quotes today was "Hey Cam, you know what the read option is in the NFL? You have the option to read in the papers how you got smoked in that game."


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 21, 2012, 08:01:50 PM
If Newton would just play like an NFL QB he'd probably be better off.  And then he could use his running maybe once a game to catch people off guard.  The guy has a hell of an arm, if he'd work on it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 23, 2012, 11:09:49 AM
If Newton would just play like an NFL QB he'd probably be better off.  And then he could use his running maybe once a game to catch people off guard.  The guy has a hell of an arm, if he'd work on it.

One of the problems with these ultra athletic QBs (Vick, Newton, even to an extent Roethlisberger) is that they are so used to just being physically superior and being able to exert their will on the field that they tend to make some poor decisions.  As much as I wish (as a Giants fan) that Eli had the mobility of one of them, sometimes I'm glad he just throws the ball away a lot. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: slog on September 23, 2012, 12:30:42 PM
(http://thebiglead.fantasysportsven.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/tebow-helmet-pass-9-23-12.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on September 23, 2012, 12:51:59 PM
Haha, that didn't take long for someone to make.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on September 23, 2012, 02:05:46 PM
So Philbin decides to do one of those terrible bullshit last second timeouts to 'ice' the kicker, thus negating the blocked field goal and giving the Jets the win.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on September 23, 2012, 02:09:43 PM
Really Lions, really?  REALLY?  :awesome_for_real: :oh_i_see: :uhrr: :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on September 23, 2012, 02:20:42 PM
Really Lions, really?  REALLY?  :awesome_for_real: :oh_i_see: :uhrr: :ye_gods:
That was really strange refreshing the score at work, 27-27, 27-41, 41-41. lolwut.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 23, 2012, 02:24:03 PM
So Philbin decides to do one of those terrible bullshit last second timeouts to 'ice' the kicker, thus negating the blocked field goal and giving the Jets the win.  :oh_i_see:

I laughed. 


Also, on an unrelated note, the referees once again proving that they are fucking terrible.  Not because they are getting things wrong at an incredible rate, but because they just seem to take FOREVER to get things right.  Ugh.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on September 23, 2012, 06:26:08 PM
Are we trying to hit midnight with this game tonight?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 23, 2012, 06:39:52 PM
The NFL needs to give the regular refs ANYTHING THEY FUCKING WANT.   It's going to seriously start hurting them in the pocket if they don't. 



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 23, 2012, 07:02:17 PM
Good god this is turning into a damn baseball game.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 23, 2012, 07:13:30 PM
Good lord, I turned it off because I was boring, came back to check the score, and it's still HALFTIME???


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on September 23, 2012, 07:21:06 PM
Good lord, I turned it off because I was boring
I don't know if you can blame the game for that.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 23, 2012, 07:38:05 PM
Good lord, I turned it off because I was boring
I don't know if you can blame the game for that.


 :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 23, 2012, 07:58:52 PM
I'm caught up on Dr. Who at least. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 23, 2012, 08:18:32 PM
Good lord, I turned it off because I was boring
I don't know if you can blame the game for that.

Heh, stupid mistypes.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 23, 2012, 08:56:27 PM
THAT WILL BE TALKED ABOUT.

Thanks replacement refs  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 23, 2012, 08:57:39 PM
I guess 70K people screaming Bullshit on national TV might get some play


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 23, 2012, 08:59:42 PM
My initial reaction was no-good, and I don't have a horse in the race, but damned if it wasn't close.  Its impossible to tell for sure from the camera angles they showed if it went wide before it got even with the upright or not.  More fuel for the fire, either way.

To say nothing of the rest of the shitty calls.

I think I'm just going to stop watching until they get the real refs back at this point actually, screw it.  They kept saying the replacements would get better with time, but I see no evidence that this is the case.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 23, 2012, 09:00:01 PM
What the fuck was Belichek thinking putting his hands on a ref? I don't know what they did to piss him off, but that was a real dick move.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 23, 2012, 09:01:57 PM
What the fuck was Belichek thinking putting his hands on a ref? I don't know what they did to piss him off, but that was a real dick move.

I think he was thinking "That was wide right, not to mention your calls on that last drive were shit, you incompetent fucks."


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 23, 2012, 09:17:44 PM
What the fuck was Belichek thinking putting his hands on a ref? I don't know what they did to piss him off, but that was a real dick move.

Well......he's a raging dick.  We knew that already.

He'll get a nice fine. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Slayerik on September 24, 2012, 08:18:46 AM
And he'll still be wiping his ass with hundos.

Lions game made me sad. It was a tough weekend to be a Michigan man. (Lions, Wolverines, Tigers all suckin ass).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 24, 2012, 08:31:17 AM
I didn't watch the NE/BAL game, but per Adam Schefter and other stuff, it sounds like Belichick was trying to get some answers about the ruling and whether it would be reviewed, etc and couldn't get an answer out of anyone and he ended up pissed off about the situation.

Now, that doesn't excuse it, and he should (and probably will) be fined, but it also sounds like someone, ANYONE should have responded to the Coach of one of the teams playing about a play that ended the game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 24, 2012, 08:39:05 AM
Well if he put his hands on a ref, he should be fined. Luckily, there are no refs in the NFL. Ergo, no fine.

Right?

BTW, what time did that Sunday night game end anyway?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 24, 2012, 08:48:50 AM
The game ended around Midnight. I've said I wasn't going to watch, but damn if this isn't like some trainwreck I can't take my eyes off of.

That being said, I didn't watch the whole game. I watched the first quarter and then turned it back on at the end. I can only take so much of a 4 hour fiasco.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 24, 2012, 09:05:12 AM
The best part of the slow games? Remember how they pushed back the start times of the afternoon games to avoid overlap?

Even ignoring the overtime crap this weekend, there were still games with around 10 minutes to go when the afternoon games started. Good times.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on September 24, 2012, 09:36:47 AM
Now I know it wasn't a close game, but Fox went dark on the Eagles game at 6:58pm with several minutes left to go. 

Most of you probably don't care, but I almost strangled myself with frustration.  Philly is 1st and goal on the 2 with 30 seconds left in the half.  Vick has been horrendous so far.  Does Any Reid give the ball to his most reliable player, McCoy?  Nope.  He calls for 4 pass plays.  On the 4th, Vick fumbles and the Cards run it all the way back for a TD to end the half.

Now, I understand that with 30 seconds and no time outs, there is time for 4 pass plays versus just one running play.  But after the first pass failed, there was still time ro run it.  And after the 2nd,  And after the 3rd.  McCoy is the best player on the team and he was never even on the field for the series.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on September 24, 2012, 10:24:00 AM
The Steelers’ Larry Foote Told The Replacement Refs “You Should Go Kill Yourselves” (http://deadspin.com/5945891/the-steelers-larry-foote-told-the-replacement-refs-you-should-go-kill-yourselves)

Quote
You know the replacement referees are a debacle when a player gets injured on a dirty play that wasn't flagged, and no one notices because it wasn't even the worst uncalled dirty play of the quarter.

That honor goes to Pittsburgh's Ryan Mundy going helmet-to-helmet on Darius Heyward-Bey, requiring a neck brace and stretcher for Heyward-Bey. But later in the fourth, on what would be the Raiders' game-winning drive, Steelers DE Ziggy Hood was locked up with Oakland guard Mike Brisiel when his left knee was taken out from the side by tackle Willie Smith. The hit straddled the line between cut block and chop block, but the Steelers were immediately furious. LB Larry Foote began jawing with the refs, as did Hood as he was being helped off the field.

In the Oakland Coliseum, the visiting team's and referees' locker rooms are across the hall from each other, and both must take the same tunnel off the field. After the final play, Foote made a beeline for the locker room to get there at the same time as the officials. Jory Rand of CBS Pittsburgh saw what went down.

Quote
Larry Foote was the first Steeler to exit the field. I was set up nearby for our postgame show, and heard someone scream, "You should go kill yourselves. Y'all (bleep)ing suck!"

I leaned around the corner and saw Foote enter the Steelers room, while several officials, entering their room, craned their neck to see who it was that had yelled at them.

Foote had already left the room by the time media was allowed in so we were unable to ask him about it.

Scoring is up across the league, and defenses will eagerly tell you a big part of that is the refs. Naturally more inclined to swallow the whistle than draw attention to themselves by calling a penalty that doesn't exist, the refs are letting the already-borderline-dirty tactics of linemen go unexamined. Pass-rushers have already complained about the absence of offensive holding calls. And if we know anything about football players, it's that they'll push and push to see just how much they're allowed to get away with. For Larry Foote, a frustrating no-call in a frustrating game in a frustrating young season was just his breaking point.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 24, 2012, 10:31:09 AM
I relish in the joy of watching Mike Vick get pummeled mercilessly and fumbling the ball when he should have scored. Just awesome.

I only watched one game all the way through yesterday, the Houston/Denver game. It's becoming painfully apparent that the Broncos just need to fire their fucking O coordinator. When Peyton has to call plays in the no huddle, he's lighting people up. When they run the normal offense, Denver looks inept and unable to move the ball. How else to explain Denver being limited to field goals until they were more than 2 TD's behind and they pretty much had to unleash Petyon? Denver's defense looks like dog shit this season. They sure couldn't do much to stop the long bomb yesterday other than give the Texans two straight roughing the passer penalties that is going to cost somebody a major fucking fine today.

Also, Pittsburgh's defense is really not good this year. Jim Schwarz is a fucking idiot. Blaine Gabbert wins a game. The Jets don't lose a game they should have lost, but they sure are going to miss Revis for the rest of the season. Saints are 0-3 and look in complete disarray, with a defense so dogshit, they let the Chiefs score 18 unanswered points. This is apparently the theme of this season - dogshit defenses that should be much better. Like, say, the Redskins who have given up 30 points to 3 opponents, only 1 of which should have scored that much. Falcons and Cardinals might actually be for fucking realz, y0.

And the replacement officials still suck major ass and shouldn't be there.

And finally, WHAT THE FUCK SAN FRANCISCO? COULDN'T STAND TO BE CALLED THE BEST TEAM IN FOOTBALL? MINNE-FUCKING-SOTA??? FUCK YOU.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 24, 2012, 10:38:28 AM
Just to show how ridiculous the NFL is right now, I decided this weekend to take the underdog on the money line for every single matchup in the league. Why? Because when the games are left completely unofficiated, anything can happen. Here's what I found out. I put $5 on every single money lined underdog for 13 games on Sunday.

I went 8-5. My biggest hit of the day? KC over the Saints at a $16 win on a $5 play. Vegas cleaned out anybody who took the favorites yesterday, because nobody can trust traditionally good teams to win with these refs. SF lost, the Saints lost, the Colts lost, the Lions lost, the Eagles lost, the Chargers lost, and the Steelers lost. The only games the big "favorites" won were the Cowboys and the Bears.

Basically I made 10x my starter bet on Sunday because even Vegas has no clue what's going on with the NFL right now. Parity? Chaos is more like it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 24, 2012, 11:28:11 AM
I only watched one game all the way through yesterday, the Houston/Denver game. It's becoming painfully apparent that the Broncos just need to fire their fucking O coordinator. When Peyton has to call plays in the no huddle, he's lighting people up. When they run the normal offense, Denver looks inept and unable to move the ball. How else to explain Denver being limited to field goals until they were more than 2 TD's behind and they pretty much had to unleash Petyon? Denver's defense looks like dog shit this season. They sure couldn't do much to stop the long bomb yesterday other than give the Texans two straight roughing the passer penalties that is going to cost somebody a major fucking fine today.

The defense got better after we benched Porter. He was getting torched. And yes, back to back roughing the passer penalties? Really? We didn't need to HELP them score. But, after the half they "only" scored 10 points.

Offensively speaking... yeah, not sure what's going on, but let Manning be the OC, basically. I will say though, it doesn't help when your players are dropping passes as well, and WHY THE FUCK did Thomas NOT DRAG HIS FOOT on that touchdown.

I was dismayed to see some commentary about Manning. The dude is looking good. Those few bombs he had made me reassured a bit about his arm-strength, so I came out of this game feeling good, considering Houston seems to be the most complete team in the NFL at the moment. Watt is scarey good.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on September 24, 2012, 11:35:30 AM
I was dismayed to see some commentary about Manning. The dude is looking good. Those few bombs he had made me reassured a bit about his arm-strength, so I came out of this game feeling good, considering Houston seems to be the most complete team in the NFL at the moment. Watt is scarey good.
Yes with the Niners losing the Texans will likely take the top spot in many writers' rankings.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on September 24, 2012, 11:39:21 AM
That was a fun weekend of Fantasy football - not. Played Detroit's D over Cinci, since they were playing the lowly Titans. oops.
Thomas for Denver - would have been great if you got points for coming really close...
McCoy for Philly - yea, good luck getting running back points when you are trailing by three touchdowns all game.
Yay, Graham got a touchdown! To go with his total 27 some odd yards...

Jay Cutler.  :oh_i_see:

At least I had the Titan's kicker!

And the Bears won.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 24, 2012, 11:53:18 AM
Bears offense... officially still not good. Adding Brandon Marshall only helps if Cuntler isn't running for his life or Marshall actually catches the ball when it's thrown to him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Slayerik on September 24, 2012, 11:53:39 AM
RG3 and Jason Hanson are the two reasons I'm 2-1....I drafted Chris Johnson in the first round. Ouch.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on September 24, 2012, 01:39:07 PM
I only watched one game all the way through yesterday, the Houston/Denver game. It's becoming painfully apparent that the Broncos just need to fire their fucking O coordinator. When Peyton has to call plays in the no huddle, he's lighting people up. When they run the normal offense, Denver looks inept and unable to move the ball. How else to explain Denver being limited to field goals until they were more than 2 TD's behind and they pretty much had to unleash Petyon? Denver's defense looks like dog shit this season. They sure couldn't do much to stop the long bomb yesterday other than give the Texans two straight roughing the passer penalties that is going to cost somebody a major fucking fine today.


My favorite part of that game? Watching the close up of Peyton's disgust face after a failed play - he looks back at the Mike McCoy like: "seriously, I told you these plays weren't going to work jackass".

And I just don't understand why PHI McCoy and NE Ridley don't get 20+ carries a game regardless.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on September 24, 2012, 01:43:30 PM

And I just don't understand why PHI McCoy and NE Ridley don't get 20+ carries a game regardless.

I almost want Vick to get his elbow broken so McCoy gets 25+ carries a game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: slog on September 24, 2012, 01:45:54 PM
I was dismayed to see some commentary about Manning. The dude is looking good. Those few bombs he had made me reassured a bit about his arm-strength, so I came out of this game feeling good, considering Houston seems to be the most complete team in the NFL at the moment. Watt is scarey good.
Yes with the Niners losing the Texans will likely take the top spot in many writers' rankings.


I got the exact opposite impression about Peyton.  He looked old and his passes lacked zip.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 24, 2012, 01:47:44 PM
Payton Manning looks better than I expected, considering he just got back from a year off from the sport after having a crazy neck fusion surgery.  Also, he's playing for a completely new team and is still better than 75% of the QBs in the league. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 24, 2012, 02:36:07 PM
I was dismayed to see some commentary about Manning. The dude is looking good. Those few bombs he had made me reassured a bit about his arm-strength, so I came out of this game feeling good, considering Houston seems to be the most complete team in the NFL at the moment. Watt is scarey good.
Yes with the Niners losing the Texans will likely take the top spot in many writers' rankings.


I got the exact opposite impression about Peyton.  He looked old and his passes lacked zip.

Did you see the previous games?

Because, his throws ,especially the deep ones had more accuracy and more oomph. There is no way he would be throwing those deep balls even a week ago, from what we could see. His finding his rhythm and shaking off the rust. He is NOT pre-injury Peyton, but he IS coming along.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 24, 2012, 02:40:26 PM
Injuries also have a significant mental component.  The first few games will be tough as Peyton gets used to the fact that he can take a hit without having to fear that he will be paralyzed.  Sure, he isn't the Peyton of old, but he still has some life left in his career.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 24, 2012, 02:53:13 PM
He's still an upgrade over Tebow.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 24, 2012, 03:21:34 PM
He's still an upgrade over Tebow.  :why_so_serious:

Christian Ponder is an upgrade over Tebow.   I think I'd take a 50 year old Testeverde over Tebow.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 24, 2012, 03:25:10 PM
I thought Peyton had some more zip on his medium-deep balls as well (20 yarders or so). I hope he shakes the rust and the OC off enough to pay me back for drafting either Decker or Thomas in every league this year.

Shockingly not nervous about tonight. No one really expects Seattle to put up a fight, so if they get smoked it won't be that big a deal. I expect a tough game, and GB to pull away in the 4th quarter. I would not be surprised at repeat of the Dallas game though- the crowd is going to be fucking INSANE tonight. GB isn't a fragile as Dallas, but the Seahawks and their fans also believe more now that they put Dallas away (and now that their only loss of the year is to an undefeated team....WTC?) . Really wish we still had tickets  :heartbreak:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 24, 2012, 04:43:46 PM
This is nothing new from either side of the ball in the new NFL, but god damn how do you not call this when its LITERALLY IN YOUR FACE

(http://www.abload.de/img/untitled-13jsns.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: slog on September 24, 2012, 04:55:06 PM
I was dismayed to see some commentary about Manning. The dude is looking good. Those few bombs he had made me reassured a bit about his arm-strength, so I came out of this game feeling good, considering Houston seems to be the most complete team in the NFL at the moment. Watt is scarey good.
Yes with the Niners losing the Texans will likely take the top spot in many writers' rankings.


I got the exact opposite impression about Peyton.  He looked old and his passes lacked zip.

Did you see the previous games?

Because, his throws ,especially the deep ones had more accuracy and more oomph. There is no way he would be throwing those deep balls even a week ago, from what we could see. His finding his rhythm and shaking off the rust. He is NOT pre-injury Peyton, but he IS coming along.

Is he better? Yes.  Is he worth 18 million?  No.  Lot's of wounded ducks out there in Denver.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on September 24, 2012, 04:58:12 PM
This is nothing new from either side of the ball in the new NFL, but god damn how do you not call this when its LITERALLY IN YOUR FACE

(http://www.abload.de/img/untitled-13jsns.gif)
That ref wasn't paying attention, he doesn't have either of them on his fantasy team


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 24, 2012, 06:12:59 PM
I was dismayed to see some commentary about Manning. The dude is looking good. Those few bombs he had made me reassured a bit about his arm-strength, so I came out of this game feeling good, considering Houston seems to be the most complete team in the NFL at the moment. Watt is scarey good.
Yes with the Niners losing the Texans will likely take the top spot in many writers' rankings.


I got the exact opposite impression about Peyton.  He looked old and his passes lacked zip.

Did you see the previous games?

Because, his throws ,especially the deep ones had more accuracy and more oomph. There is no way he would be throwing those deep balls even a week ago, from what we could see. His finding his rhythm and shaking off the rust. He is NOT pre-injury Peyton, but he IS coming along.

Is he better? Yes.  Is he worth 18 million?  No.  Lot's of wounded ducks out there in Denver.

Given our choice, it was the right one. I think it's probably early  to say he's not worth it. Atlanta played brilliant defense for those picks. They aren't exactly slouch defenses in ATL or HOU.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 24, 2012, 07:48:37 PM
That was a pretty insane series of shitty passblocking by the Packers at the end of the first half.  The Seahawks could be pretty decent by the end of the year if Wilson comes along.  Their defense looks stout.  Well, at home anyway.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: slog on September 24, 2012, 07:49:28 PM
Yea anything is better than Tebow. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on September 24, 2012, 08:46:43 PM
And the last play of the game is Roger Goodell's worst nightmare.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 24, 2012, 08:50:40 PM
Time to boycott the NFL.  That was a complete joke.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 24, 2012, 08:54:34 PM
I don't fucking believe what i just saw.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 24, 2012, 08:54:53 PM
I've got it figured out - this season is some kind of elaborate dada performance piece.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 24, 2012, 08:58:46 PM
This is a sham. I've never been physically ill over watching anything in sports. That did it. I am sick to my stomach.

This is going to be looked at as one of the darkest years in the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Llyse on September 24, 2012, 09:00:52 PM
This is a sham. I've never been physically ill over watching anything in sports. That did it. I am sick to my stomach.

This is going to be looked at as one of the darkest years in the NFL.

Someone mind linking/elaborating for our Non-US readers?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on September 24, 2012, 09:02:04 PM
Wow. Glad I'm a Seattle fan.

After the phantom PI that kept Greenbay's TD drive alive in the fourth, I was feeling ok about a couple of the goofy calls that went Seattle's way after it.
Then there were a couple more.
Then there was the last play.
Wow.

Devil's advocate, it was very close to a simultaneous catch - I'm assuming the official didn't get a good look at the catch at the top of the jump and made the ruling based on Tate having both hands around the ball on the ground.
That being said - it should have been ruled a pick. And probably offensive PI.

Normally anything that causes the Pack to lose makes me happy, but that was hard to swallow.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 24, 2012, 09:02:53 PM
This is a sham. I've never been physically ill over watching anything in sports. That did it. I am sick to my stomach.

This is going to be looked at as one of the darkest years in the NFL.

Someone mind linking/elaborating for our Non-US readers?

Last play of GB-Seattle, a fairly clear interception was called as a touchdown reception instead, giving the wrong team the win. On the most watched game of the week.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on September 24, 2012, 09:03:08 PM
It was the single worst, yet entertaining (for all the wrong reasons), end of an NFL game I've ever seen.  I would call it a total fiasco but that doesn't really seem strong enough to encompass the amount of  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 24, 2012, 09:04:48 PM
This is a sham. I've never been physically ill over watching anything in sports. That did it. I am sick to my stomach.

This is going to be looked at as one of the darkest years in the NFL.

Someone mind linking/elaborating for our Non-US readers?

I really can't. It's just insane. After 26 penalties, they ruled a simultaneous catch on a hail mary pass that was against a defender's chest after a guy had already been shoved out of the way by the offensive guy who had his arms on the ball. At worst, it's a pick. But the refs don't agree on the field. They go to review on replay, they don't overturn it. They then force the players from Green Bay they just jobbed out of a win to put their helmets back on, come back from the locker room. And stand there while the Seahawks make a meaningless extra point.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 24, 2012, 09:06:05 PM
The victory might go in Seattle's column, but no one won that game. Football lost. Might have been a hell of a game, but we will never know. Goodell and the owners just took a drippy steaming shit all over the integrity and entertainment value of their own league. I won't watch another game with these refs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 24, 2012, 09:06:30 PM
The NFL needs to give the regular refs ANYTHING THEY FUCKING WANT.   It's going to seriously start hurting them in the pocket if they don't. 

THIS. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on September 24, 2012, 09:07:20 PM
I'd say the referees' union is the true winner of that game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 24, 2012, 09:09:46 PM
The refs aren't even fucking asking for much other than a "don't fuck with our pension" bit.

So disgusted. It finally cost someone a win.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on September 24, 2012, 09:11:46 PM
This game made Vince McMahon cry.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 24, 2012, 09:12:09 PM
The refs aren't even fucking asking for much other than a "don't fuck with our pension" bit.

So disgusted. It finally cost someone a win.

While that may be technically true due to the last play, there was a drive extending phantom pass interference call on Green Bay's touchdown drive near midfield. So we really have no idea who would have won a game staffed by the normal incompetent refs and not this collection of clowns.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 24, 2012, 09:14:25 PM
While that may be technically true due to the last play, there was a drive extending phantom pass interference call on Green Bay's touchdown drive near midfield. So we really have no idea who would have won a game staffed by the normal incompetent refs and not this collection of clowns.

There were two OPI calls missed on Seattle's last drive as well.  (Rice and Tate)  The one on Rice was actually called against GB.

The second half was a disaster.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on September 24, 2012, 09:16:16 PM
Now imagine the Packers end up losing their division or even miss the playoffs completely by one game.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on September 24, 2012, 09:17:02 PM
I have a feeling the League is going to be getting calls tomorrow from the people who really have the power:  The Networks.  The product is basically unwatchable at this point and I imagine they are fairly steamed at the degradation of their multi-billion dollar investment in product.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 24, 2012, 09:21:01 PM
I have a feeling the League is going to be getting calls tomorrow from the people who really have the power:  The Networks.  The product is basically unwatchable at this point and I imagine they are fairly steamed at the degradation of their multi-billion dollar investment in product.

I'm frustrated enough to call DirecTV and cancel my sunday ticket, but I'l sleep on it. I'm sure I would be one tiny voice in a sea of indifference.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 24, 2012, 09:26:11 PM
Time to boycott the NFL.  That was a complete joke.

This. I am apoplectic with rage at this bullshit. It was bad enough that Sidney Rice wasn't called for fucking mugging the shit out of Sam Shields in the 4th quarter - bad enough they called Shields for pass interference when he had technically become the receiver since Rice was boxed out. No, that was fucking ridiculous enough. And all through the second half there were TERRIBLE penalties called. The roughing the passer on Erik Walden that kept a drive alive. The nothing pass interference calls that Green Bay got - and yes, Green Bay got a number of bullshit calls they absolutely had no business getting on that TD drive. Then the two really shitty spots of the ball on GB's TD drive that forced them to use a challenge on that 4th down spot. The Jennings TD that got overturned wasn't a TD, but it sure as shit was a fucking first down, but since they reviewed the play and got the spot a yard too short, then the clownshoes refs spot Rodgers scramble short - but at least they overturned that blind man's call.

But that play in the endzone... it just boggles the mind. Bad enough they don't see the blatant offensive PI in the endzone, I can understand that one. But to say that the wide receiver came down with the ball when he's on the bottom of the pile with barely one arm touching the fucking ball while Jennings had both hands and his chest practically smothering the pigskin was crazy. And then to REVIEW THAT SHIT and GET IT FUCKSTUPID WRONG.

THERE IS NOT ENOUGH WAAARRRRGGGGGBBLLLLEELE in the world. I have never seen any shit so insane in my life. And to see Golden Tate in the interview talking about how they deserved that game and Pete Carroll's smug cuntface. Fuck the Seahawks. I can never root for them again.

I'm still undecided about an actual boycott but I certainly will think twice about wasting my time while these fucking Mickey Mouse refs are in the house.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Zetleft on September 24, 2012, 09:28:48 PM
This is the worst thing I have ever seen in an NFL game.  It's now a complete and utter joke.  Put an asterisks or whatever you want on this season cause it really doesn't matter now.  This is really the best thing that could have happened for the locked out refs but for the fans this is just a slap in the face. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on September 24, 2012, 09:33:57 PM
Fuck the Seahawks. I can never root for them again.

Your rage as a Packers fan is justified but misplaced.  It should be directed squarely at Goodell and the owners for setting up this kind of fail.

I personally am not a fan of either team nor do I particularly dislike either team so to be honest I'm happy the game ended like it did, because if the end of that game doesn't move those greedy fucking owners to get a deal done, nothing will.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 24, 2012, 09:39:10 PM
And then to REVIEW THAT SHIT and GET IT FUCKSTUPID WRONG.


I'm pretty sure the ruling on the field was that it was a simultaneous catch (which always go to the offense).  I'm WELL with you that it WASN'T actually.  However, the important point is that it was the ruling on the field, because you can't review it.  That part of the play is not up for review after the call has been made on the field. You can still rule if it was in bounds, or if the ball hit the turf, etc, but possession on a ruled simultaneous catch is not reviewable.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 24, 2012, 09:44:04 PM
I saw a good comment on Facebook (believe me, I am as surprised as you!) saying the players need to stop crossing the line and playing in the games with scab refs. That would certainly get things moving. I don't know how much ALL the players cared until tonight. Almost every guy in the league keeps at least one eye on the MNF game, and they know damned well it could be them getting fucked over next week.

Won't ever happen, but I like the idea. Plus it would probably piss Scott Walker off. That might be the only good thing about tonight...I hope that cocksucker is a huge Packers fan.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 24, 2012, 09:45:39 PM
And then to REVIEW THAT SHIT and GET IT FUCKSTUPID WRONG.


I'm pretty sure the ruling on the field was that it was a simultaneous catch (which always go to the offense).  I'm WELL with you that it WASN'T actually.  However, the important point is that it was the ruling on the field, because you can't review it.  That part of the play is not up for review after the call has been made on the field. You can still rule if it was in bounds, or if the ball hit the turf, etc, but possession on a ruled simultaneous catch is not reviewable.

Here is the text. Source: http://static.nfl.com/static/content/public/image/rulebook/pdfs/11_Rule8_ForwardPass_BackPass_Fumble.pdf

Quote
If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players  retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an  opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.

One ref signaled touchdown, the other signaled that it was a touchback/dead play/whatever that signal ws supposed to be. Now, first off, it was absolutely NOT a simultaneous catch... and then it _WAS_ reviewd and upheld. The review is if it's a touchdown. If they are reviewing that information there is opportunity to say "nope, that was not a touchdown". The call was that it was a touchdown.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on September 24, 2012, 09:50:31 PM
Was a real shitty call but lost in this is that that type of outcome is why dbs are taught to spike the ball down rather than try to catch it. Jennings didn't play it correctly.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on September 24, 2012, 09:55:54 PM
Maybe the ref who signaled touchdown had Tate on his fantasy team.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 24, 2012, 10:02:17 PM
And the one who made them kick the extra point had Seattle -1.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 24, 2012, 10:04:27 PM


One ref signaled touchdown, the other signaled that it was a touchback/dead play/whatever that signal ws supposed to be. Now, first off, it was absolutely NOT a simultaneous catch... and then it _WAS_ reviewd and upheld. The review is if it's a touchdown. If they are reviewing that information there is opportunity to say "nope, that was not a touchdown". The call was that it was a touchdown.

One of those calls (touchdown) WAS the call on the field though.  If you've already called it a simultaneous catch (which it must have been to be a touchdown, (which ended up being confirmed as the "ruling on the field", because the ref ruled it as the ruling on the field standing) you can't "un call" it a simultaneous catch.  At that point it doesn't matter if it "really" was a simultaneous catch or not.  We all acknowledge it was an interception. Anyway...  And if you can't uncall it a simultaneous catch, then the call has to stand, because the ball clearly didn't hit the ground, and the players were clearly in bounds.  The problem is that they called it a simultaneous catch/touchdown to begin with  when it clearly wasn't, and they should have at least huddled up and made the officially "ruling on the field" very clear from the beginning.

They fucked up badly, but I don't think they had any wiggle room by the letter of the rules to un-fuck their mistake once it had been fucked in the first place.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 24, 2012, 10:19:21 PM
The review is if it is a score or not, not if it is a simultaneous catch or not. AT the VERY LEAST the booth could have called it incomplete.

Apparently you can't cut and paste from the rulebook, but check out Rule 15, Section 9.

http://www.nfl.com/rulebook


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 24, 2012, 10:57:24 PM
Can any of you imbed a little video of the play?  I don't think I'll be able to see it here from work in Euroland.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on September 24, 2012, 11:07:02 PM
Can any of you imbed a little video of the play?  I don't think I'll be able to see it here from work in Euroland.
Probably won't last long on YouTube. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VKfkA5QMvfg)

Tate interview after the game. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9uK0xhpCB4s)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Megrim on September 24, 2012, 11:55:06 PM
Notwithstanding the blatant shove in the back on the defender seconds prior, when I look at that as a newcomer to handegg, and I'm not so sure that the call is worth being "outraged" about. To my layman's eye, that's what I would call a "contested catch". Both guys have hands on the ball, both of them go down struggling for it. One lands on top of the other, but the dude going under doesn't let go of the ball (that I could see).

I don't know what the rules are for simultaneous catches in the NFL, so I'm not sure how you guys resolve those situations (I'll read sickrubik's link later, ty man). Personally I'd penalise for the defender push more than anything.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 25, 2012, 12:32:37 AM
Okay, I have watched the replay numerous times now, and here is what I think.

- The Pass Interference was clear.  I mean, that Green Bay defender clearly rammed the back of his shoulder pads into Tate's defensively outstretched hands, seriously impeding his vertical leaping ability.   :awesome_for_real:  But yeah, just kidding, that was offensive PI.

- The simultaneous catch....I have to admit, I am not seeing the rage.  Tate quite clearly gets his hand on the ball at the same time that Jennings does, and never relinquishes it.  Had Jennings not been there, Tate would have caught it.  If Tate had not been there, Jennings would have caught it.  Instead, they both touched it at the same time.  The reason you are all taking the defenders side is because, other than wanting to take his side automatically because of the PI, he has the ball in his breadbasket and is using two hands.  Tate has his arm extended and is using just the one hand.  That doesn't make it any less of a "catch".  The timing is as near simultaneous as is reasonable, and the replay didn't seem to change that.  I bet the refs were looking at it on replay and thinking to themselves "oh shit, the PI is clear, but the catch still appears simultaneous WTF do we do?  Oh well, we don't have any choice but to follow the letter of the rule, and man are we going to get hell for it."

Does it pass the playground test?  Nope.  But there are tons of rules in the NFL that don't pass the playground test, and I can think of worse ones that I have seen.  

I agree with the general sentiment, but on closer scrutiny I am not sure I would have done it differently.  It is that it followed an obvious offensive PI is what makes it so grievous.

Do we have the exact wordings somewhere on the simultaneous catch?  I mean, we all know it goes to the offense...but does it get specific about what constitues a catch?  Because that is what I am basing my argument on...the idea that Tate's catch was just as legit, despite the poorer body position.

Edited to add:  That the defender doesn't knock the ball down in the first place is so boneheadedly stupid, selfish and telling in its lack of awareness, that I have a hard time feeling sympathy for Jennings.  He can thank the replacement refs for not being the biggest goat of the entire season, because they are going to absorb all the blame.  Unforgivably stupid on his part.

Second edit:  Apparently the guys in the booth doing the replays are the same NFL retirees as always, so keep that in mind.  This has the hallmarks of a ruling that may have been technically called correct, but just doesn't pass the smell test.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on September 25, 2012, 01:33:27 AM
The way it looks to me is Jennings caught the ball and Tate caught Jennings.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 25, 2012, 01:44:40 AM
I don't know...the replays make it really hard to see for certain.  The impression I was left with after multiple replay viewings is that Tate got his left hand on the ball at the same time (the hand you cannot see in the above pics).  Really hard to tell, which is probably why the replay officials couldn't find reason to overturn it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Megrim on September 25, 2012, 01:48:18 AM
Exactly what I though - he has his left hand under the ball.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 25, 2012, 02:02:37 AM
Exactly what I though - he has his left hand under the ball.

And because you expressed lack of knowledge in your earlier post, just so you know:  The interference call is not reviewable.  In other words, because they missed that call on the field, they do not have the ability after the fact during the replay review to say "well shit, he totally shoved the other guy!" and make their call based on that.  The are only able to look at the scoring part of the play itself, and even that is tricky...they have to have conclusive evidence to overturn the call on the field.

I would not call anything that I saw conclusive.  I am very much in doubt and tempted to call it a simultaneous catch.  Had the call on the field gone the other way?  I would have been more tempted to reverse it in that situation, but to be honest that would have been more my sense of fairness taking over (because of the PI), not my understanding of the rule.

Unless there is some provision out there that describes how the body position of the catch has influence on the simultaneous catch rule?  Touchdown.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Megrim on September 25, 2012, 02:25:03 AM
Ok, so can a coach flag that? If they saw the Packers guy getting pushed, can he throw a flag to challenge or something?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 25, 2012, 02:28:50 AM
No.  Penalties are not reviewable in any way, even if it impacted something else that is reviewable.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 25, 2012, 02:49:40 AM
No.  Penalties are not reviewable in any way, even if it impacted something else that is reviewable.

And even if it were, no challenges during the final two minutes of a half.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 25, 2012, 03:09:46 AM
No.  Penalties are not reviewable in any way, even if it impacted something else that is reviewable.

And even if it were, no challenges during the final two minutes of a half.

Right.  Except that the booth can choose to review in those final two minutes.  Last but not least, all scoring plays are given at least a cursory glance.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 25, 2012, 05:07:05 AM
The review is if it is a score or not, not if it is a simultaneous catch or not. AT the VERY LEAST the booth could have called it incomplete.


I've seen this said a few different places now, so I feel like maybe I am the one missing something, but on what possible grounds could that have been ruled and incomplete pass?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 25, 2012, 05:26:37 AM
- The simultaneous catch....I have to admit, I am not seeing the rage.  Tate quite clearly gets his hand on the ball at the same time that Jennings does, and never relinquishes it.  Had Jennings not been there, Tate would have caught it.  If Tate had not been there, Jennings would have caught it.  Instead, they both touched it at the same time.  The reason you are all taking the defenders side is because, other than wanting to take his side automatically because of the PI, he has the ball in his breadbasket and is using two hands.  Tate has his arm extended and is using just the one hand.  That doesn't make it any less of a "catch".  The timing is as near simultaneous as is reasonable, and the replay didn't seem to change that.  I bet the refs were looking at it on replay and thinking to themselves "oh shit, the PI is clear, but the catch still appears simultaneous WTF do we do?  Oh well, we don't have any choice but to follow the letter of the rule, and man are we going to get hell for it."

It's pretty damned clear that Jennings caught the ball and the refs royally fucked up, all the way around.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Megrim on September 25, 2012, 05:46:26 AM
How do you explain this  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4ZFs57d-xc)then?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 25, 2012, 06:03:33 AM
How do you explain this  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4ZFs57d-xc)then?

I think that one is a lot more clear simultaneous catch than the one last night.  But I've been thinking about more about this and here is how I see the problem.

1) There were two separate calls on the field.  This is probably the single biggest problem, because it leaves room open for controversy.
2) To make matters worse, they did not confer.  In times like this, it is common for the refs to huddle up and at least decide on one thing.
3) In fact, they never even officially announced the "ruling on the field" prior to the official review of the play.
4) It was the last play of the game, and changed the outcome in an obvious, simple way.

All of this, combined with the fact that it really does appear like it is at best a very very borderline simultaneous catch make the whole thing a lot more scandalous.  Imagine the reaction if this was the sequence.

1) Play happens.
2) Same rulings - but the referees huddle.
3) The head referee announces "The ruling on the field is a simultaneous catch, resulting in a Touchdown for Seattle."
4) They go under the hood (which they still probably would have), they review to make sure the ball never hit the ground, the players were in bounds, etc.
5) They come out and announce that by rule the possession of the ball is not reviewable, and that the ruling on the field stands.

People would still be saying they botched the call - but the way the whole thing was handled was total bush league and that is REALLY where all the outrage gets its legs.   The call wasn't clear, the teams were on the field, then gone into the locker room, they had to call the teams back out to kick an extra point that didn't matter for the outcome.  The whole thing just felt like a sham, and that really contributed to the reaction we are seeing.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on September 25, 2012, 06:06:14 AM
How do you explain this  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4ZFs57d-xc)then?
On that play both guys got both hands on the ball practically at the same time. By rule, it goes to the passing team, so long as both of them maintain control.

For the Seattle play, it seemed to me that a lot of people looking at it didn't see Tate get both hands on the ball. Personally, I thought he did, though Jennings clearly had better control of it. If Tate only had one hand on it, it seems likely that Jennings could have turned his body at some point and pulled the ball away from him. All that being said though, it still looked to me that Jennings got his hands on it before Tate, meaning it should have been a pick.

As for the PI - yes it was a blatant push in the back, but every commentator, ex-football guy, etc. I have listened to this morning all agree - that doesn't ever get called on Hail Marys, it just doesn't.

Really, the bogus PIs each way and the mysterious roughing the passer on the earlier pick were more egregious calls.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 25, 2012, 06:40:04 AM
The major difference between the Tate "catch" and the Austin catch is position and hands.

In the Austin catch you have two guys facing each other with two hands on the ball wrestling for control simultaneously. In the Tate situation you have one guy who closes a ball against his chest and if you watch it in replay you actually see the defender pinning Tates free arm against himself with the ball while the other arm is readjusting independant of the play. Therefore, Tate never has two hands on the ball to complete the play until the defender has gone to the ground.

By rule: "It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and then an opponent subsequently gains joint control."

Also by rule control of a catch occurs when a player: "has the ball in his HANDS or ARMS prior to touching the ground" note the plural. Two hands beats one hand when it comes to control.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 25, 2012, 06:51:00 AM
I can see how you would interpret that two hands trump one in this case, but it is not explicitly stated anywhere is it?  Certainly not in that text.  There is no doubt whatsoever that a one handed catch is a completely legitimate catch.  There is just no precedence for this happening in this way.

I like Megrim's take on this.  The call may have been iffy, but it is probably the subsequent manner of its handling that is generating the rage, and the fact that people are looking for every reason to go after these replacement refs.

In every playground in America, this is an interception.  By official NFL rules, it is less clear.  I can see how they got to where they got.

Question:  is possession reviewable in this case, or was it only a case of complete versus incomplete?  What exactly were they allowed to review?



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on September 25, 2012, 06:59:39 AM

I think that one is a lot more clear simultaneous catch than the one last night.  But I've been thinking about more about this and here is how I see the problem.

1) There were two separate calls on the field.  This is probably the single biggest problem, because it leaves room open for controversy.
2) To make matters worse, they did not confer.  In times like this, it is common for the refs to huddle up and at least decide on one thing.
3) In fact, they never even officially announced the "ruling on the field" prior to the official review of the play.
4) It was the last play of the game, and changed the outcome in an obvious, simple way.

All of this, combined with the fact that it really does appear like it is at best a very very borderline simultaneous catch make the whole thing a lot more scandalous.  Imagine the reaction if this was the sequence.

1) Play happens.
2) Same rulings - but the referees huddle.
3) The head referee announces "The ruling on the field is a simultaneous catch, resulting in a Touchdown for Seattle."
4) They go under the hood (which they still probably would have), they review to make sure the ball never hit the ground, the players were in bounds, etc.
5) They come out and announce that by rule the possession of the ball is not reviewable, and that the ruling on the field stands.

People would still be saying they botched the call - but the way the whole thing was handled was total bush league and that is REALLY where all the outrage gets its legs.   The call wasn't clear, the teams were on the field, then gone into the locker room, they had to call the teams back out to kick an extra point that didn't matter for the outcome.  The whole thing just felt like a sham, and that really contributed to the reaction we are seeing.

Well put - I think this  sums it up perfectly. It was the two refs standing next to each other making different calls that has led to all this outrage. No matter how that would have been called, someone would be calling bullshit - but a consistent ruling would have made it more palatable.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 25, 2012, 07:22:07 AM


Question:  is possession reviewable in this case, or was it only a case of complete versus incomplete?  What exactly were they allowed to review?



Possession is not reviewable in this case.  They could review if the ball hit the ground, if the players were in bounds, or (if it had mattered) the spot of the ball.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 25, 2012, 07:22:37 AM
The review is if it is a score or not, not if it is a simultaneous catch or not. AT the VERY LEAST the booth could have called it incomplete.


I've seen this said a few different places now, so I feel like maybe I am the one missing something, but on what possible grounds could that have been ruled and incomplete pass?

That the receiver who "caught" the ball (Tate) did not in fact have possession of the ball. Which is absolutely true. Tate never had possession by standards of NFL's own rules.

The call would still be utter bullshit and shows a gigantic flaw in the rule system. If you can review the play to make sure the ball didn't have hit the ground, and that the player(s) were in bounds to define a clean catch and TD, you can sure as hell check to see if the person who was ruled to have made the touchdown even ever had possession, which he clearly did not, and the crux of the entire debate.

It was a blown call followed up by a bullshit loop hole. Given the NFLs continued trek towards making sure plays are not controversial to make things like a FG (see NE/BAL) reviewable is ludicrous. Even allowing yourself to review the play to make sure parts of a clean reception are intact but not possession is even more ludicrous. It's more insulting that they review the play to make sure it was a clean reception/touchdown but not to check perhaps the biggest one... possession.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 25, 2012, 07:25:35 AM
I can see how you would interpret that two hands trump one in this case, but it is not explicitly stated anywhere is it?  Certainly not in that text. 
What are you talking about?

Again, with emphasis.

Quote
If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players  retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an  opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.

Jennings had both arms wrapped around the ball in flight, and pulled the ball to his chest and landed on the ground. That is absolutely, every-time else, control of the ball.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 25, 2012, 07:37:05 AM
It's so clear that I'm not even sure why there is discussion about it.  The popular media has also given their vote to the call being complete shite.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 25, 2012, 08:10:39 AM
Yeah, I just saw the drive extending PI call on Chancellor that led to the GB touchdown.  It was textbook, perfect defense.  I can't with a straight face say that GB deserved to win this game any more than Seattle did.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 25, 2012, 08:12:18 AM
Yeah, I just saw the drive extending PI call on Chancellor that led to the GB touchdown.  It was textbook, perfect defense.  I can't with a straight face say that GB deserved to win this game any more than Seattle did.

Nobody deserved a win. The game was a complete mess. If anything they should just declare it a tie and move on, bring back the real refs, and pretend it never happened.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 25, 2012, 08:14:27 AM
Yeah, I just saw the drive extending PI call on Chancellor that led to the GB touchdown.  It was textbook, perfect defense.  I can't with a straight face say that GB deserved to win this game any more than Seattle did.

If we are going to go that route, there were two OPI calls that were not called correctly on the Seattle drive at the end.

Nobody deserved a win. The game was a complete mess. If anything they should just declare it a tie and move on, bring back the real refs, and pretend it never happened.

Actually, no. Remember this and fix the rules. There are some distinct issues with the rules that, regardless of the mess of the initial call, need to be looked at.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 25, 2012, 08:16:17 AM
They can't make possession a replay rule. That's a pipe dream. You'd be there all fucking day on every fumble, most catches, and we're already pushing the limits of replay time as it is.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 25, 2012, 08:18:07 AM
They can't make possession a replay rule. That's a pipe dream. You'd be there all fucking day on every fumble, most catches, and we're already pushing the limits of replay time as it is.

You should absolutely check it on scores. That has always been my point. If we're already checking 800 things on scoring plays to make sure it stands, there's no reason why we can't look at a situation like we did last night.

Edit: At least Peter King seems to think it would be reviewable inside the endzone.

Quote
Now, as to the replay: Let's be clear about what can and can't be reviewed. Simultaneous possession between the goal lines cannot be reviewed. Simultaneous possession in the end zone can be reviewed. (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/peter_king/09/25/replacement-referees-packers-seahawks/index.html)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on September 25, 2012, 08:47:32 AM
I can see how you would interpret that two hands trump one in this case, but it is not explicitly stated anywhere is it?  Certainly not in that text. 
What are you talking about?

Again, with emphasis.

Quote
If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players  retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an  opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.



Jennings had both arms wrapped around the ball in flight, and pulled the ball to his chest and landed on the ground. That is absolutely, every-time else, control of the ball.

By the basic rules, Jennings doesn't have "possession" until he hits the ground with control of the ball. There's been a number of people watching the replays now saying that Tate had both hands on the ball before either of them came down, and he kept both hands on it throughout the play. I know this is being debated, as some people feel he only had one hand on it, but from my views, it looks like he got his left hand inside of Jennings arms and then his right hand over the top. If Tate did in fact have both hands on the ball all the way through the catch to the ground, then it is potentially a simultaneous catch.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 25, 2012, 08:50:41 AM
Non-reviewable plays per rule 15 section 9 under replay included but are not limited to:

Status of the clock, Proper Down, Penalty Administration, Runner ruled down by defensive contract (no fumble), Forward progress unrelated to goal line, recovery of a loose ball that doesn't involve a boundary line or end zone, FGs above the upright, indavertent whistles.

The truth is that you can review to see if a pass is complete/incomplete/intercepted anywhere on the field (end zone or otherwise). The other truth is that there's nothing in the rule book that says possession is reviewable. It has to be explicitly stated in the rules to be a reviewable play, and judgement calls are not. However, it's not explicited DENIED either. The possession rule falls into that grey area of "but not limited to".


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 25, 2012, 09:06:15 AM
I can see how you would interpret that two hands trump one in this case, but it is not explicitly stated anywhere is it?  Certainly not in that text.  
What are you talking about?

Again, with emphasis.

Quote
If a pass is caught simultaneously by two eligible opponents, and both players  retain it, the ball belongs to the passers. It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an  opponent subsequently gains joint control. If the ball is muffed after simultaneous touching by two such players, all the players of the passing team become eligible to catch the loose ball.



Jennings had both arms wrapped around the ball in flight, and pulled the ball to his chest and landed on the ground. That is absolutely, every-time else, control of the ball.

By the basic rules, Jennings doesn't have "possession" until he hits the ground with control of the ball. There's been a number of people watching the replays now saying that Tate had both hands on the ball before either of them came down, and he kept both hands on it throughout the play. I know this is being debated, as some people feel he only had one hand on it, but from my views, it looks like he got his left hand inside of Jennings arms and then his right hand over the top. If Tate did in fact have both hands on the ball all the way through the catch to the ground, then it is potentially a simultaneous catch.

If we are taking the rule as "possession" until he hit the ground, then we have to have the same standards for Tate. Tate does not meet those standards. Jennings was the only player to have possession from air to ground. He lands on the ground on his back with theball wrapped in his arms in complete control.

And every commentator I've seen so far has said sided with that end of things. The ONLY THING I've seen anyone say in defense is that the "simultaneous catch" can't be overturned, which now, at least to some commentary (including Peter King) seems to indicate is not true in the case of endzone reviews.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on September 25, 2012, 09:21:59 AM
By the rules, all Tate needs to have possession, assuming we take Jennings out of the equation, is that he keeps one or more hands on the ball, without the ball bobbling, all the way through hitting the ground.  From what I've seen, it doesn't appear that his hand(s) come off the ball at any point. Based on that, he caught it just as much as Jennings did, even though Jennings clearly had greater control of it. It's stupid, but could in fact be a legit simultaneous catch by the rules.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on September 25, 2012, 09:23:08 AM
You are Canadian.  Yes? OK.  We can stop now.

edit: Only halfway serious here.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on September 25, 2012, 09:28:03 AM
Unsurprisingly, the NFL supports the decision to not overturn the Seattle touchdown (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000066164/article/nfl-supports-decision-to-not-overturn-seahawks-touchdown?module=HP11_headline_stack)



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 25, 2012, 09:31:31 AM
AT least we know now for certain that simultaneous catch IS reviewable.

Still. Bullshit. But not surprising that they are backing the decision. They have to right now.


Quote from: Drew Brees
Ironic that our league punishes those based on conduct detrimental. Whose CONDUCT is DETRIMENTAL now? (http://twitter.com/drewbrees/status/250596095208595456)

 :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 25, 2012, 10:03:21 AM
I don't know...the replays make it really hard to see for certain.  The impression I was left with after multiple replay viewings is that Tate got his left hand on the ball at the same time (the hand you cannot see in the above pics).  Really hard to tell, which is probably why the replay officials couldn't find reason to overturn it.

The rules for possession don't say "if you have a hand on it." It's pretty clear from the replays and everything else that POSSESSION of the ball is in Jennings favor, not Tate's. Tate doesn't even have clear control of the ball until after Jennings lands on top of him AND Tate struggles with it for a few minutes. It wasn't a simultaneous catch in any way shape or form. It was one guy catching the ball and another guy trying to take it away from him. Once Jennings' feet land in bounds with possession, the play is over and he has the catch. People can talk about simultaneous catches all they want, but this clearly did not fall under that rule except for the fact that one incompetent ref called it that.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 25, 2012, 10:06:14 AM
Hmm, I didn't realize that was reviewable only in the endzone.  Interesting.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 25, 2012, 10:07:59 AM
Having now seen the play in full HD on a larger screen, I have to admit that it appears more like Jennings should have been awarded the catch.  That said, I can still see why the rules themselves are causing an issue here.

The real problem is that, having now also seen the entire fourth quarter....Oh My God.  That was beyond farcical, and so painful to watch.  An utter disaster of a quarter for that crew, holy shit.  I understand better now why people are so furious about the call at the end - it was the straw that broke the camel's back.  So many flags, so many bad calls.  I don't think it necessarily favored either side in total, but what an utter disaster.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 25, 2012, 10:11:07 AM


The real problem is that, having now also seen the entire fourth quarter....Oh My God.  That was beyond farcical, and so painful to watch.  An utter disaster of a quarter for that crew, holy shit.  I understand better now why people are so furious about the call at the end - it was the straw that broke the camel's back.  So many flags, so many bad calls.  I don't think it necessarily favored either side in total, but what an utter disaster.  

Yeah, this is also really important.  The whole 4th Quarter was a mess and certainly contributed to the reaction at the end.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 25, 2012, 10:13:42 AM
This is the part that pisses me off.

Quote
It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control.

Jennings CLEARLY gained control first.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 25, 2012, 10:23:50 AM
I wonder if their interpretation has something to do with the time of when the go to the ground (because we know how important that part of it is for the definition of a catch).  Does Tate have a better handle on it by the time they hit the ground, and is that where the "simultaneous" part of the rule begins to apply?



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 25, 2012, 10:27:32 AM
The interpretation is clearly "we don't want to give the real refs any more power".


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 25, 2012, 10:29:56 AM
They are the only major pro league (MLB, NHL, NBA, NFL) in America that still insists they treat their refs like part-time talent. The fact they aren't willing to make them full time employees showed how little they value their service. Now, we all know just how important that service and experience is in maintaining the professionalism on the field. College football is more fun to watch right now than the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on September 25, 2012, 10:36:37 AM
They are the only major pro league (MLB, NHL, NBA, NFL) in America that still insists they treat their refs like part-time talent. The fact they aren't willing to make them full time employees showed how little they value their service. Now, we all know just how important that service and experience is in maintaining the professionalism on the field. College football is more fun to watch right now than the NFL.

Indeed.  Just pay them.  Hell, if full time is possible do it.  I'll be the first to admit I didn't think the replacement refs were going to be this bad.  I thought they'd be a bit bad, but not THIS consistently bad.  I'm also getting the impression they are getting worse, not better, as time goes on in part due to the fact that the players and coaches don't respect them, they seem intimidated by the crowds, etc.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on September 25, 2012, 10:40:52 AM
This is the part that pisses me off.

Quote
It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control.

Jennings CLEARLY gained control first.

Upon further review, I agree with you. Tate had one hand on the ball only as he fell and there's no way he would have maintained possession if it weren't for Jennings holding the ball there for him. If you only look at it from when the hit the ground on, then it appears that they both have possession - which I believe is what the ref did.

So yea, shitty call.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 25, 2012, 10:46:29 AM
They are the only major pro league (MLB, NHL, NBA, NFL) in America that still insists they treat their refs like part-time talent. The fact they aren't willing to make them full time employees showed how little they value their service. Now, we all know just how important that service and experience is in maintaining the professionalism on the field. College football is more fun to watch right now than the NFL.

Apparently, part of the owners proposal to the refs is to make some of them full-time... but of course, the ones who aren't have to give up their pensions.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 25, 2012, 11:22:06 AM
This is the part that pisses me off.

Quote
It is not a simultaneous catch if a player gains control first and an opponent subsequently gains joint control.

Jennings CLEARLY gained control first.

Yeah this is the bit that makes it seem open-and-shut to me.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 25, 2012, 12:22:26 PM
SportsCenter was on when I went home for lunch. They were talking about it, of course.... They showed a bunch of different angles including one from outside the redzone looking straight in. You had a great shot of both Jennings and Tate's arms. Tate has an arm up in there, but does not appear to have a hand on the ball. Jennings had gotten both hands on the ball first and was drawing it into his chest. As they come down, Tate's right hand comes up and grabs Jennings on the wrist. Not on the ball. As his feet hit the ground, Jennings has control of the ball. As they fall into a clump, Tate continues to fight for the ball, but Jennings's has it far best the time that normally would be called legally a reception/interception.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 25, 2012, 01:23:36 PM
I can't wait to see what the Onion has to say about this. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on September 25, 2012, 01:41:40 PM
http://www.replacementgoogle.com/


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 25, 2012, 01:58:48 PM
You guys see Huff Po this afternoon?  The headline reads:  N-F-aiL

I also beat the headline... the start of the story.

Quote
You have to boycott the NFL, now.


UPDATE:  Steve Young Suffers Concussion Attempting To Explain Final Call In Packers, Seahawks Game (http://www.theonion.com/articles/steve-young-suffers-concussion-attempting-to-expla,29683/)

I love the Onion.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sky on September 25, 2012, 02:42:57 PM
Been slacking on watching games this year. Caught the end of the Ravens game and there were some crappy calls.

Then I saw the second half of the Packers game last night and what the fuck is going on? One nice thing about the big tv, we get a nice clear view of things. Two hands, pulled into chest, maintains possession to the ground, knee down. Interception. Clear as day.

Add that in with the complete clown show of calls and yeah, I'm ok with not watching the NFL until they get their shit together. Make the guys full time NFL employees, it's not like the NFL is hurting for dough. One star player could pay all the refs in the league a sweet salary.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on September 25, 2012, 02:45:20 PM
The refs want 30 million over 7 years.  The NFL makes 9.5 billion PER YEAR.

I think the holdout is to show that the owners are 'tough negotiators'. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Megrim on September 25, 2012, 02:48:07 PM
SportsCenter was on when I went home for lunch. They were talking about it, of course.... They showed a bunch of different angles including one from outside the redzone looking straight in. You had a great shot of both Jennings and Tate's arms. Tate has an arm up in there, but does not appear to have a hand on the ball. Jennings had gotten both hands on the ball first and was drawing it into his chest. As they come down, Tate's right hand comes up and grabs Jennings on the wrist. Not on the ball. As his feet hit the ground, Jennings has control of the ball. As they fall into a clump, Tate continues to fight for the ball, but Jennings's has it far best the time that normally would be called legally a reception/interception.

Ok cool, so with more clarity it becomes apparent.

So, my next question is, why didn't the defender just swat the ball down, instead of risking a catch?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 25, 2012, 02:49:12 PM
So, my next question is, why didn't the defender just swat the ball down, instead of risking a catch?

'Cos he's a rookie. Rookie mistake.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 25, 2012, 02:50:15 PM
Yep. There's a glory/showoff thing involved there too.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on September 25, 2012, 02:51:45 PM
So, my next question is, why didn't the defender just swat the ball down, instead of risking a catch?

You mean like they did the Tenn/Det game?  :oh_i_see:



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on September 25, 2012, 03:44:39 PM
Uh oh. :awesome_for_real:

(http://i.imgur.com/OemOD.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 25, 2012, 04:15:46 PM
Apparently some of the current NFL replacement refs weren't even good enough for the Lingerie League (http://deadspin.com/5946112/)....

 :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 25, 2012, 04:16:14 PM
I wonder who he was rooting for? He is probably a Bears fan, and the Pack is a bitter rival. Plus Seattle is right in his wheelhouse, politically  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: caladein on September 25, 2012, 05:05:14 PM
So, my next question is, why didn't the defender just swat the ball down, instead of risking a catch?

This comes up with Hail Mary plays often enough, and the main thing is that it's probably pretty hard to turn off that part of your brain even if you are getting clear instructions to do so from the coaching staff. And they don't always give it in situations they should from my understanding.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: TheWalrus on September 25, 2012, 10:57:18 PM
 I don't know what game you guys were watching. That was clearly a touchdown. If it hadn't been a legitimate touchdown, the NFL has clear countermeasures that prevent that from being ruled one.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 25, 2012, 11:33:05 PM
 :headscratch:

Not sure if serious?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on September 26, 2012, 12:02:37 AM
Not. it's a meme. Google "Todd Akin", if you dare (don't blame me if your IQ drops).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 26, 2012, 08:01:28 AM
Bill Plaschke reams Roger Goodell. (http://newsok.com/bill-plaschke-nfl-losing-credibility-with-each-blown-call-by-replacement-refs/article/3712948)


Quote
Want to know my favorite statistic of Week 3? Sixteen of 20 coach's challenges resulted in overturned calls, meaning officials made the wrong decision on 80 percent of some of the biggest plays. Think about that.
Want to know my second-favorite statistic? When you crunch the numbers, if the NFL gave the locked-out referees everything they wanted, it would cost about $100,000 extra per team per season. That equals about four games' pay for one of the team's lowest-paid players. The owners are watching their sport burn because they won't improve the officials' compensation by about one-fourth the amount they would pay a backup guard? Think about that.
OK, real quick, I've got a third-favorite statistic from last weekend. There were 13 penalty first downs in the game between the Patriots and the Ravens, which is only the most in the history of the NFL.

 :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 26, 2012, 08:09:55 AM
It's not just about the money. If that was the issue, they would have already made the deal.

The NFL wants the right to replace officials at will, based on metrics they don't have to explain, and hire more of them to reduce the overall pool of compensation. It's crap. The officials deserve to be held to standards, but saying you can pull them from any game for no reason and for no pay? That's criminal.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 26, 2012, 08:17:51 AM
It's not just about the money. If that was the issue, they would have already made the deal.

The NFL wants the right to replace officials at will, based on metrics they don't have to explain, and hire more of them to reduce the overall pool of compensation. It's crap. The officials deserve to be held to standards, but saying you can pull them from any game for no reason and for no pay? That's criminal.

I hadn't heard about that part. That explains a lot. It's not just about the fucking pensions, it's about their idea that the refs are expendable and easily replaceable by cheaper counterparts.

Which is abso-fucking-lutely false, as we've seen entirely too much lately.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 26, 2012, 08:20:07 AM
It's not just about the money. If that was the issue, they would have already made the deal.

The NFL wants the right to replace officials at will, based on metrics they don't have to explain, and hire more of them to reduce the overall pool of compensation. It's crap. The officials deserve to be held to standards, but saying you can pull them from any game for no reason and for no pay? That's criminal.

Link? Not that I don't believe you, but I've heard such conflicting stuff everywhere, I have no idea what to believe anymore.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 26, 2012, 08:28:42 AM
http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/negotiations-with-referees-at-a-standstill-despite-replacements-debacle-on-monday-night-football-092512

QUESTION ME WILL YOU???  :awesome_for_real:

In all seriousness, the reporting on the gap has been really piss-poor. This article clears it up a bit. The big sticking point to me is:

Quote
While the NFL referees group feels it does a credible job grading and assigning its officials based on performance, the NFL insists it must have more control regarding what happens to underperforming officials. To that end, the NFL wants to have three seven-member officiating crews at the ready who could step in and replace officials it feels aren’t making the grade. An underperforming official could be pulled for an entire game or even longer. The NFLRA, which has prepared and trained a list of up-and-coming officials to replace those near retirement age, is opposed to the notion of the NFL choosing a taxi squad of crew that could undermine their chemistry, experience and perspective.

Basically, the NFL wants 3 "Fuck you" crews ready to go if they decided they don't like a group of refs. They say it's about performance. It's not. The NFL wants to try to control the situation by never allowing this to happen again. Training more officials means they don't have to worry about "uppity refs" getting the upper hand anymore.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on September 26, 2012, 09:16:28 AM
The NFLRA and NFL agreed to terms on that subject though
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/09/26/nfl-and-refs-agree-on-backup-officials-but-pension-issue-remains/

Pensions are still the main point


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on September 26, 2012, 09:16:41 AM
According to  Adam Schefter (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/250988047699681280) an agreement between the NFL and NFLRA has been reached.

EDIT: DAMMIT SEGORIS
DOUBLE EDIT: http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8427652/locked-nfl-referees-return-early-week-sources


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 26, 2012, 09:21:55 AM
According to  Adam Schefter (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/250988047699681280) an agreement between the NFL and NFLRA has been reached.

EDIT: DAMMIT SEGORIS
DOUBLE EDIT: Apparently the deal is in place and they're trying to get the officials back for this weekend.

Damn it.  There goes my new pickem strategy of choosing the hometeam across the board.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 26, 2012, 07:59:42 PM
Jim Daopoulos ‏@RefereeJimD
Looks like the NFL refs will be working starting Thursday in Balt. Deal appears to be completed



Thank christ - now we can go back to meaningless bitching about how terrible Ed Hochuli is and how Goodell is trying to turn the league into flag football as opposed to the god damn nightmare this season has actually has been so far.  Though it's still absurd that it actually did take a full on blown game that will certainly impact the playoffs for the NFL to get over themselves.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 26, 2012, 10:25:44 PM
What's everybody's beef with Hochuli that I am missing?  I mean, I know he made some terrible call in a big game a couple years ago (or something), but otherwise I think he's a pretty good ref.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on September 27, 2012, 12:32:16 AM
Eh, I think it is selection bias as he is one of the few refs so recognizable that people know his name.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 27, 2012, 04:46:13 AM
Eh, I think it is selection bias as he is one of the few refs so recognizable that people know his name.
Pretty much the this.  I don't really have an issue with him,  but his name gets thrown around a lot.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 27, 2012, 05:59:37 AM
The Denver game enshrined Hochuli's name in the hall of infamy. Not so much for the blown call, but his admission that he did blow the call which decided the game. That is when I remember first hearing the name.

Also, the man is a lawyer... and from some of those pics, a beast.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 27, 2012, 06:24:58 AM
I really like Hochuli. The call was on par with Jim Joyce in the MLB blowing a perfect game. It was horrible, they both owned up, but they are both very solid officials.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on September 27, 2012, 08:14:53 AM
I like Hochuli too, it's Jeff Triplette that deserves all the hatred.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 27, 2012, 08:19:54 AM
If we're talking favorite refs, I tend to like Mike Carey a lot.  He's right up there with Hulkchuli in terms of getting things right, but he usually makes the calls with a bit of flair and style. 

I was trying to find a classic call from him, but the first thing I came across is him about to take on the entire Eagles Defense.  :drill: That's how you keep control of a game!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OfnjQPzFq8


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 27, 2012, 09:21:55 AM
I am salivating with anticipation at the first bad call tonight.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 27, 2012, 09:23:05 AM
Thank fuck they settled. I told multiple people Monday night that I wasn't watching the NFL until the refs were back. I would have had the DTs something fierce on Sunday.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 27, 2012, 09:29:21 AM
If we're talking favorite refs, I tend to like Mike Carey a lot.  He's right up there with Hulkchuli in terms of getting things right, but he usually makes the calls with a bit of flair and style. 

I was trying to find a classic call from him, but the first thing I came across is him about to take on the entire Eagles Defense.  :drill: That's how you keep control of a game!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7OfnjQPzFq8

I'll give him credit for that, but when players are forbidden to touch a ref... it loses a bit of its luster. However, that is indeed how you control a game, by using that restriction to its fullest.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 27, 2012, 10:18:45 AM
Thank fuck they settled. I told multiple people Monday night that I wasn't watching the NFL until the refs were back. I would have had the DTs something fierce on Sunday.

This. Green Bay is playing New Orleans on TV this weekend and I really relish seeing Green Bay play a defense that isn't made of fucking killers. 49ers, Bears and Seahawks all have fucking mean-ass defenses. New Orleans? Not so much.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 27, 2012, 10:20:52 AM
Yeah I am hoping Jordy Nelson finally vindicates my drafting of him (WAY too early  :ye_gods: ) by going apeshit. For some reason I get the feeling the Packers are a little miffed and might just run the score up on Katrinaville.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on September 27, 2012, 10:24:28 AM
What's everybody's beef with Hochuli that I am missing?  I mean, I know he made some terrible call in a big game a couple years ago (or something), but otherwise I think he's a pretty good ref.

Being that I'm in Arizona, I get to watch just about every single Denver game.  The Denver v. San Diego game he called was just terrible.  That was one of the worst blown calls I've ever seen.   The rest of the game wasn't much better.  Overall, however, he's not bad. 

I also went to school with two of his kids. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 27, 2012, 10:32:49 AM
If Rodgers doesn't get his shit together against the worst defense in the NFL, I'm benching his sorry #1 overall first pick for Ben Rapypants.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on September 27, 2012, 10:39:00 AM
Eh, I think it is selection bias as he is one of the few refs so recognizable that people know his name.
Pretty much the this.  I don't really have an issue with him,  but his name gets thrown around a lot.


Hell I barely understand the sport and even I know who this Ref is.


Those Guns, bigger then some of the players man!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 27, 2012, 10:30:24 PM
If Rodgers doesn't get his shit together against the worst defense in the NFL, I'm benching his sorry #1 overall first pick for Ben Rapypants.

In the JV league, I am actually getting THIS CLOSE to putting his stupid ass on the bench and playing Jake Locker.  I ensured that I would get him via the autodraft, and he has done nothing but fuck me so far.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 27, 2012, 11:22:51 PM
If Rodgers doesn't get his shit together against the worst defense in the NFL, I'm benching his sorry #1 overall first pick for Ben Rapypants.

In the JV league, I am actually getting THIS CLOSE to putting his stupid ass on the bench and playing Jake Locker.  I ensured that I would get him via the autodraft, and he has done nothing but fuck me so far.

What do you want for him?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on September 28, 2012, 05:48:35 AM
I want for him to play better.  Maybe throw, I don't know, two touchdowns or something.  300 yards or so.

I'm not going to trade him, silly, I love me some Aaron Rodgers  :awesome_for_real:  I just like complaining more.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 28, 2012, 06:18:03 AM
He'll get better. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on September 28, 2012, 07:33:12 AM
If Rodgers doesn't get his shit together against the worst defense in the NFL, I'm benching his sorry #1 overall first pick for Ben Rapypants.

In the JV league, I am actually getting THIS CLOSE to putting his stupid ass on the bench and playing Jake Locker.  I ensured that I would get him via the autodraft, and he has done nothing but fuck me so far.

In my league I just benched Cutler to play Ponder. I am ashamed.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on September 28, 2012, 08:50:01 AM
I want for him to play better.  Maybe throw, I don't know, two touchdowns or something.  300 yards or so.

I'm not going to trade him, silly, I love me some Aaron Rodgers  :awesome_for_real:  I just like complaining more.

You sure? I might be able to make it worth your while.  :grin:

Back on topic, in case anyone missed the game last night, here's the Cribbs hit. Amazingly, he walked off under his own power.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMnzHjRZpZw



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 28, 2012, 10:14:53 AM
He got knocked the fuck out!  :ye_gods:

Congratulations to Cleveland for making a game of it, but I sure as shit didn't watch it.

As for Aaron Rodgers, he's had 3 straight games against what may be 3 of the best defenses in the league (all 3 are at least top 10), in games with replacement refs whose grasp of the pass interference rules could be charitably described as inadequate. He's playing New Orleans this Sunday and their defense is shit. If he doesn't come good against them, THEN you bench his ass.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 28, 2012, 10:29:06 AM
Yep- you'd be insane to bench Rodgers this week. Unless you are playing me; then it is keenly encouraged.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on September 28, 2012, 11:53:08 AM
NO is a total mess right now, he's going to work his frustrations out on them to the tune of 350+ yards.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 28, 2012, 12:00:09 PM
He got knocked the fuck out!  :ye_gods:

Congratulations to Cleveland for making a game of it, but I sure as shit didn't watch it.

Yeah... piss off.  :why_so_serious:

Seriously, all I hear is how the Browns look like an up and coming team - not here obviously, but the news stations are all starting to pipe in with that drivel. They did so well in this game. They are on the verge. Yadda... fuck off. Winless. No one gives a shit if you looked good in the NFL, it's about the wins. Just venting here, but getting tired of hearing how good the Browns are looking. The Browns have a better shot going 0-16 this year than actually winning a game. To me, that is horrible - no matter how young the team is or how great they look. Bottom line, nothing is changed and nothing is getting done. Haden not playing is simply an excuse. I hate being a Browns fan... pretty much all the time, but I have no recourse because living in Pittsburgh... yeah no.

At least the Tribe fired Acta... hope they'll keep Sandy around.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 28, 2012, 12:17:18 PM
Your QB is a stud. They need to keep that kid upright, and find him receivers who don't completely fucking suck.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on September 28, 2012, 12:25:48 PM
I don't know about stud, but they definitely need receivers who can actually catch the ball.  Greg Little must have lobster claws for hands.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 28, 2012, 12:26:45 PM
Your QB is a stud. They need to keep that kid upright, and find him receivers who don't completely fucking suck.

I don't know about Weedon being a stud, but he sure as fuck has no one to throw it to.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on September 28, 2012, 12:43:29 PM
I can usually tell a lot about a QB from his ability to make throws when they matter, and Weedon has it. His receivers have hung him out to dry, but the kid can make plays. He's got the right mentality and above the shoulders decision-making you need. He'll improve on the latter with even more time in the league, and his arm is fine.

Weedon's limited by 2 things:

1 - Clevelands running game is awful. He's getting blitzed like crazy because nobody believes in the Brown's ability to get yardage on the ground. Richardson is a rookie, and he will get better, but dear lord the offensive line is a disaster. They've had to throw the ball 167 times to 75 runs because their running average is only 3.5 from Trent (35th in the league), and they are usually behind. Trent's good up close, but he's not going to help you move down the field.

2 - Greg Little is a dipshit. He needs to take this job seriously, or get the hell off the football field. Quit dancing. Quit posing. MAKE CATCHES! He's been targetted 25 times and only have 11 catches. Also he has only 9 YAC on those 11 receptions? NINE?!?! Dude, get open and move around. Make a play. Do something to help out your QB.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on September 28, 2012, 12:56:26 PM
WR has been the thorn recently, even worse when you consider we could have had Jones and/or Greene in the last two years. But nope..Heckert believes finding receiver talent is the bargain bins which has not worked. They replaced Braylon Edwards with Braylon Edwards II it seems... And both of their go to receivers were picked in the draft (Gordon in the suppl) and both had not played in a year due to discipline issue. I get finding a diamond in the rough, but sometimes you have to buy a cut one to complete the set. One thing is for sure though, Weeden, surprisingly, is a step up from McCoy - but it is pretty evident that the receiver position is the problem.

I'd say since Shurmur is pretty much a lame duck at this point, just full on develop the running game and concentrate on blocking schemes for the O-line. I'd be very surprised if Shurmur is kept on with new ownership coming online soon. In fact, I doubt he makes it through the season as ownership will start flexing its muscles before the season ends to give the city of Cleveland another injection of false hope.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 28, 2012, 01:32:09 PM
They've drafted wrong for a while now. I always thought McCoy was a decent QB, if he had someone to throw to OR someone to block for a decent running game. Shit, he did just fine when Peyton Hillis was running people over. When Hillis went to shit last year, so did McCoy. Instead of drafting Weedon, they should have gone for some O line talent and then a second round wideout. It would have cost them less money and set them up better for the future. As it is now, Weedon has the same problems McCoy did because the team didn't get magically better.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 28, 2012, 02:01:34 PM
As much as I loved Holmgren as a coach, he is a fucking dumpster fire as a personnel guy. Look at his drafts in Seattle-

Code:
1999
RD 1 - Lamar King - DE (No. 22 overall)
RD 3 - Brock Huard - QB
RD 3 - Karsten Bailey - WR
RD 4 - Antonio Cochran - DE
RD 5 - Floyd Wedderburn - G
RD 5 - Charlie Rogers - RB
RD 6 - Steve Johnson - CB

2000
RD 1 - Shaun Alexander - RB (19)
RD 1 - Chris McIntosh - T (22)
RD 2 - Ike Charlton - CB
RD 3 - Darrell Jackson - WR
RD 4 - Marcus Bell - LB
RD 4 - Isiah Kacyvenski - LB
RD 6 - James Williams - WR
RD 6 - Tim Watson - DT
RD 6 - John Hilliard - DT


2001
RD 1 - Koren Robinson - WR (9)
RD 1 - Steve Hutchinson - G (17)
RD 2 - Ken Lucas - CB
RD 3 - Heath Evans - FB
RD 4 - Orlando Huff - LB
RD 4 - Curtis Fuller - S
RD 4 - Floyd Womack - T
RD 5 - Alex Bannister - WR
RD 6 - Josh Booty - QB
RD 7 - Harold Blackmon - S
RD 7 - Dennis Norman - C
RD 7 - Kris Kocurek - DT

2002
RD 1 - Jeremy Stevens - TE (28)
RD 2 - Maurice Morris - RB
RD 2 - Anton Palepoi - DE
RD 3 - Kris Richard - CB
RD 4 - Terreal Bierra - SS
RD 5 - Rocky Bernard - DT
RD 5 - Ryan Hannam - TE
RD 5 - Matt Hill - T
RD 6 - Craig Jarrett - P
RD 7 - Jeff Kelly - QB

1 decent RB and a HoF guard, but then a collection of underachievers, drunks, rapists, and drunk rapists.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 28, 2012, 05:49:55 PM
McCoy doesn't have nearly the arm that Weedon has.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on September 28, 2012, 05:50:39 PM
I can usually tell a lot about a QB from his ability to make throws when they matter, and Weedon has it. His receivers have hung him out to dry, but the kid can make plays. He's got the right mentality and above the shoulders decision-making you need. He'll improve on the latter with even more time in the league, and his arm is fine.

Weedon's limited by 2 things:

1 - Clevelands running game is awful. He's getting blitzed like crazy because nobody believes in the Brown's ability to get yardage on the ground. Richardson is a rookie, and he will get better, but dear lord the offensive line is a disaster. They've had to throw the ball 167 times to 75 runs because their running average is only 3.5 from Trent (35th in the league), and they are usually behind. Trent's good up close, but he's not going to help you move down the field.

2 - Greg Little is a dipshit. He needs to take this job seriously, or get the hell off the football field. Quit dancing. Quit posing. MAKE CATCHES! He's been targetted 25 times and only have 11 catches. Also he has only 9 YAC on those 11 receptions? NINE?!?! Dude, get open and move around. Make a play. Do something to help out your QB.

Pretty much this. Weedon and Richardson both look really solid, but holy fuck find someone, ANYONE, to throw to.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on September 29, 2012, 12:01:49 AM
McCoy doesn't have nearly the arm that Weedon has.

Which matters fuckall if your receivers can't catch what you throw, or if you can't make a throw because a defensive lineman has crawled up your bunghole. Weedon may well be the next Bernie Kosar, but it won't matter until the pieces around him are good enough to make him better. McCoy was a perfectly serviceable franchise QB on a team that had any talent whatsoever.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 29, 2012, 05:50:16 AM
McCoy doesn't have nearly the arm that Weedon has.

Which matters fuckall if your receivers can't catch what you throw, or if you can't make a throw because a defensive lineman has crawled up your bunghole. Weedon may well be the next Bernie Kosar, but it won't matter until the pieces around him are good enough to make him better. McCoy was a perfectly serviceable franchise QB on a team that had any talent whatsoever.

And I think he's still younger than Weedon.  I still wasn't all that impressed with him, but you're right.  It's tough for anyone to be good with that shitstain of a team. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on September 29, 2012, 06:55:40 AM
You guys do know that his last name has no 'o' in it, right?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on September 29, 2012, 07:08:13 AM
Nope.   :awesome_for_real:

And I can't be bothered to look it up because I really don't give a shit. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: slog on September 30, 2012, 05:56:49 PM
(http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_mb6t46xHaw1qzfh3qo1_500.png)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 01, 2012, 08:58:41 AM
Ahhh, the NFL. Glad the real refs are back. Now they need to go to fucking class to re-learn what offensive pass interference and fumbles look like.

Watched the Packers/Saints game. The good news? The Packers won in thoroughly unconvincing fashion. The Saints defense is really fucking bad, but their offense while good, is still just not clicking together. They make really dumb mistakes, and their running game is not working at all. If the Packers could consistently remember who is supposed to cover who, the game wouldn't have been close. Also, the refs gave New Orleans their first TD even though Colston CLEARLY pushed his defender over. No call. Then, in the 4th quarter, Sproles clearly fumbles the goddamn kickoff after the Packers took the lead and yet the refs said he was down by contact. Some really bad calls in that one.

So Mark Sanchez? Yeah, that's the Sanchez when he doesn't have any sort of running game to take the heat off of him. 103 yards and 1 INT? And Holmes may now be hurt? Tim Tebow isn't going to help this train wreck at all but I'm sure they'll give it a try. Their running backs just aren't consistently good enough for the offense they are trying to run, and now Sanchez doesn't even have Burress to throw to. I relish the QQ when they replace their expensive ass franchise QB with The Jesus Train only to watch him complete 5 out of 20 passes and win games in the fourth quarter by a half point because GOD LOVES TIM TEBOW!

Minnesota and the Lions is just WTF? The Lions special teams is apparently a hazmat zone. Minnesota is 3-1, having beat a good SF team and now the Lions? Matthew Stafford has lost his accuracy, and suddenly not having a running game or a defensive backfield or any sort of discipline is really hindering this team. Who knew those things were important?

Buffalo's defense is a horror show. Almost 600 yards offense given up, and they blew a 14 point lead to get BLOWN THE FUCK OUT. I think the Pats just scored again. How do you spend as much money as they did on defense and have a game like that, as well as their loss to the Jets? Maybe Fitzpatrick throwing 4 picks had a little something to do with it, but shit.

The Giants might be as bad as 2-2 but the Eagles are NOT a 3-1 team. The only thing they did right last night was not turn the ball over, and have one good drive on Shady McCoy's back. The rest of the time it was two teams trying to outsorry each other. Both these teams need to learn to pass block and the Giants need to find a running game against decent defenses.

Speaking of shitty defenses, Carolina ROOFLES. Get a lead, can't hold it, and speaking of can't hold it, FUMBLES. The NFC South is Atlanta's to lose what with no one within 3 game of them. Suddenly the NFC South is the new NFC West. One powerhouse and three inept pushovers.

RGIII is all that and a bag of chips. Four games and he just lights up the fucking stat line. Too bad they don't have the defense they did last year because if they did, this might be a surefire playoff team. As it is, they will be fun to watch and might make the playoffs if they do well against their divisional opponents.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 01, 2012, 09:28:55 AM
So Mark Sanchez? Yeah, that's the Sanchez when he doesn't have any sort of running game to take the heat off of him. 103 yards and 1 INT? And Holmes may now be hurt? Tim Tebow isn't going to help this train wreck at all but I'm sure they'll give it a try. Their running backs just aren't consistently good enough for the offense they are trying to run, and now Sanchez doesn't even have Burress to throw to. I relish the QQ when they replace their expensive ass franchise QB with The Jesus Train only to watch him complete 5 out of 20 passes and win games in the fourth quarter by a half point because GOD LOVES TIM TEBOW!

I suppose it's better than losing in the fourth quarter, because god clearly hates Mark Sanchez.   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 01, 2012, 09:43:56 AM
I think it's quite clear God is a Giants' fan.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 01, 2012, 10:26:22 AM
Here are some hilarious truths about Mark Sanchez and Tim Tebow, comparatively.

Who has the better career QB rating? - Oddly enough it's Tebow with a 75.2 to Sanchez's 72.9
Who has a better winning percentage? - Actually it's Sanchez due to his 2010 winning season and playoff wins.
Who had the worse season? - Sanchez's 2009 season was by far the worst. A 63 QB rating. 
Who had the worst game? - Tebow once lost 3-7 against KC with a 20 QB rating, but Sanchez once lost to Buffalo in OT with a QB rating of 8. EIGHT!
Who had the best game? - Sanchez in 2010 beat NE with 200 yards and 3 TDs, no picks. Tebow's best is the Pitt OT win: 300 yards and 2 TDs. Advantage Sanchez since 80 Tebow yards was dump pass.
Who is better at home? - In 2011, Sanchez had 16/9 TD/INT with 1800 yards. Tebow was 3/3 TD/INT with 845 yards, and 327 yard rushing with 4 TDs. Advantage Sanchez.
Who is better on the road? - In 2011, Sanchez was 10/9 TD/INT with 1650 yards. Tebow as 9/3 TD/INT with 880 yards, 300+ ground, and 2 rushing TDs. Advantage Tebow.

The answer is simple. Play Sanchez at home, Tebow on the road. That is unless the opponent is the Pats then you always play Sanchez. If the Steelers, always play Tebow. If you play one of the Harbaughs, fucking forfeit.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on October 01, 2012, 11:10:16 AM
Also, always play Tebow in the 4th quarter if behind.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 01, 2012, 11:16:53 AM
Also, always play Tebow in the 4th quarter if behind.


With this Jets team, I think that'll be every game whether Tebow or Sanchez is the starter.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 01, 2012, 11:20:31 AM
People might want to go back and look at how well Tebow did late in the season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 01, 2012, 11:22:15 AM
People might want to go back and look at how well Tebow did late in the season.

Terrible. His worst game was against the Chiefs on the last day of the season


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 01, 2012, 11:31:49 AM
Tebow is terrible.  The Jets best option would be to buy a QB away from another team. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 01, 2012, 11:39:09 AM
Or draft one out of the craptacular class of QBs coming out. That would be just their speed.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on October 01, 2012, 11:41:01 AM
USC has a QB coming out, it's fate.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 01, 2012, 12:02:10 PM
People might want to go back and look at how well Tebow did late in the season.

Terrible. His worst game was against the Chiefs on the last day of the season

I should point out, that that was what I was getting at. Mostly responding to trippy.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 02, 2012, 05:29:22 AM
Wow.  That was an atrocious performance by Mr. Romo and his offensive brethren. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 02, 2012, 06:39:14 AM
Yep. The Cowboys have major issues, and they won't get solved by just fixing the O line. We're still tied to one of the most inconsistent QBs in the league, and Dez fucking Bryant.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on October 02, 2012, 06:44:31 AM
And not least of all:  Fuck the Cowboys.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 02, 2012, 06:58:46 AM
You know, Romo has a shitload of talent.  I don't understand what he has going on that allows him to continually have these shitbag games.  I personally love seeing the Boys of Cow suck ass, but he's borderline ridiculous.  I wonder if he wouldn't be better off with another team. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on October 02, 2012, 07:02:17 AM
As a Bears fan: How 'bought them Cowboys!

I've figured out the secret, I just need to bench Cutler in my Fantasy league like I did this week.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 02, 2012, 07:25:04 AM
You know, Romo has a shitload of talent.  I don't understand what he has going on that allows him to continually have these shitbag games.  I personally love seeing the Boys of Cow suck ass, but he's borderline ridiculous.  I wonder if he wouldn't be better off with another team. 

QB is a mental position, not just a talent position. Romo doesn't make great decisions, nor do I think he'll ever get better at it. However, the offensive line is a trainwreck. It was a trainwreck in the preseason, it's a trainwreck now. Dez Bryant needs to just go away. He's a moron who can't figure out the playbook, act like a professional, or recognize the coverage. Romo's tossing picks because he's got zero time to get free and make a decision, let alone make a good one.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 02, 2012, 07:42:10 AM
Romo clearly has the ability to make good decisions.  In some games he's flawless.  He probably needs to get a sports psychologist.  Or a new coach.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 02, 2012, 11:00:22 AM
Romo is a "GUNSLINGER." Which, BTW, if I could remove that fucking label from the football lexicon, I would. It's code for "he's got great fucking ability and the decision-making skills of a functional fucking retard."

Gunslingers will either have a great game or a bad one, depending on how shitty their O line is, how open their receivers are and whether or not they sent a photo text of their johnson to some hot chick last night. Very few gunslingers will ever be good enough to lead a team to a Super Bowl, and then only when they have a superstar wideout, a functional running game AND a defense that can survive their gunslingers mistakes. The Cowboys have none of those things on a consistent basis. Sometimes their defense is good - last night it was not - though how could it be with 5 short field possessions to deal with. Their running game can shine - but not against a good defense. Their wideouts are only stars against bad teams or when they haven't beaten their mothers in the past week.

The sooner Jerry Jones realizes he's overpaid for 90% of that roster and blows it up, the better. Romo needs a better supporting cast, period, or he will continue to be mercurial.

Incidentally, I could say the same thing about Cutler in this game. He's the exact same type of player, only he's not likeable like Romo - he's a Cuntfaced Douchenozzle begging for his former tight end O coordinator to fucking flatten him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 02, 2012, 11:03:49 AM
Dallas needs an offensive live that is cohesive and a decent RB.  They have the other tools.  Witten rocks.  Austin is fine.  Bryant needs to get traded.  

I honestly think that Jerry Jones should fine Romo for every ball thrown over 15 yards.  He doesn't see the game well enough to throw downfield.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 02, 2012, 11:04:33 AM
I hate Jay Cutler.  He's the worst human being on the planet.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 02, 2012, 12:06:26 PM
Dallas needs an offensive live that is cohesive and a decent RB.  They have the other tools.  Witten rocks.  Austin is fine.  Bryant needs to get traded.  

I honestly think that Jerry Jones should fine Romo for every ball thrown over 15 yards.  He doesn't see the game well enough to throw downfield.

I honestly think that Jerry Jones should do all us Cowboys fans a favor and drink a mixed cocktail of whatever he finds under the sink.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 02, 2012, 01:03:57 PM
That won't just help Cowboys fans.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on October 02, 2012, 01:51:08 PM
I hate Jay Cutler.  He's the worst human being on the planet.   :oh_i_see:

A friend who is a fellow Bears fan sent me this text this morning:

"Just read on nfl.com that ex Bear Tommie Harris was charged with urinating in public. The media is speculating that its Jay Cutler's fault."


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 02, 2012, 01:57:47 PM
Fucking straight it was.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 03, 2012, 01:34:57 PM
Santonio Holmes out for the year (http://espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/story/_/id/8456827/new-york-jets-wr-santonio-holmes-rest-season)

The Jets are fucked, and New England can now run the fuck away with the AFC East. The Jets signed a veteran wideout I've never heard of to help out. Why not just toss money at T.O. or Ochocinco or even Burress? They'll likely be a damn sight better than anything else on that team and it's not like Rex Ryan doesn't love assholes on his team. Get prepared for the wheels on this bus to catch on fire before they fall the fuck right off.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 03, 2012, 01:44:24 PM
The Jets need a good crash and burn. They've been getting too cocky for too long.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 03, 2012, 02:59:40 PM
Santonio Holmes out for the year (http://espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/story/_/id/8456827/new-york-jets-wr-santonio-holmes-rest-season)

The Jets are fucked, and New England can now run the fuck away with the AFC East. The Jets signed a veteran wideout I've never heard of to help out. Why not just toss money at T.O. or Ochocinco or even Burress? They'll likely be a damn sight better than anything else on that team and it's not like Rex Ryan doesn't love assholes on his team. Get prepared for the wheels on this bus to catch on fire before they fall the fuck right off.

I thought they were already on fire. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on October 03, 2012, 04:30:59 PM
Santonio Holmes out for the year (http://espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/story/_/id/8456827/new-york-jets-wr-santonio-holmes-rest-season)

The Jets are fucked, and New England can now run the fuck away with the AFC East. The Jets signed a veteran wideout I've never heard of to help out. Why not just toss money at T.O. or Ochocinco or even Burress? They'll likely be a damn sight better than anything else on that team and it's not like Rex Ryan doesn't love assholes on his team. Get prepared for the wheels on this bus to catch on fire before they fall the fuck right off.

A second Jet has hit the injured reserve list!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 04, 2012, 07:02:20 AM
Yeah Thurday Night Football! Who's excited about the...Cardinals versus...Rams...

Yeah nevermind.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 04, 2012, 07:05:48 AM
It's better than the options, I suppose. Well, I take that back.  I'll probably watch USC versus Utah.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 04, 2012, 07:18:28 AM
Yeah Thurday Night Football! Who's excited about the...Cardinals versus...Rams...

Yeah nevermind.

There are some matchups worth watching in that game.  I'm interested in the quality of Arizona's defense.  

On a side note: Has anyone found a good website that explains the X's and O's of common defensive schemes?  I was trying to explain the differences in common defensive sets to someone at work and I thought they were going to blow their circle of willis.   


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 04, 2012, 07:50:35 AM
How about this (http://football.about.com/cs/a/defformations.htm)?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 04, 2012, 08:09:23 AM
How about this (http://football.about.com/cs/a/defformations.htm)?

WAY too basic.  I need something that explains cover schemes and zone responsibilities in different cover packages.  Blitz lanes, stunts, etc.  

I was trying to explain to the guy how we decide who covers the RB out of the backfield in Man vs a cover 2.  This becomes complicated if you blitz the strong safety or a corner.  

Anything that details why play action can be effective over one package and not another would be similarly helpful.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 04, 2012, 08:15:49 AM
I doubt you'll find something that in depth on the internet, at least not easily. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 04, 2012, 08:17:59 AM
I doubt you'll find something that in depth on the internet, at least not easily

That's why I asked.  I thought someone here may have dug something out of the depths. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on October 06, 2012, 12:28:00 AM
I am getting a little tired of the unpredictability of this football season.  I mean, that should ordinarily be a good thing, but it is throwing my predictive abilities into complete disarray.  I can handle doing poorly in Fantasy Football, but not being able to pick the games worth a shit is really pissing me off. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 07, 2012, 04:43:13 PM
Sigh. So close for the Broncos... sadly Manning can't do it all himself, which is becoming apparent that is what is exactly happening at this point. Two HUGE mistakes by McGahee and another lousy fumble from Demaryius Thomas (the second in as many weeks)... plus Mays is perhaps the worst LB we've ever had. The entire Pats gameplan centered on Mays and running it down the throat of the Broncos.

And of course, we have people crying that we should have never gotten rid of Tebow. Yeah, he did SO WELL last year against the Pats (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2012011400/2011/POST19/broncos@patriots#menu=highlights&tab=recap).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 07, 2012, 05:13:56 PM
I am getting a little tired of the unpredictability of this football season.  I mean, that should ordinarily be a good thing, but it is throwing my predictive abilities into complete disarray.  I can handle doing poorly in Fantasy Football, but not being able to pick the games worth a shit is really pissing me off. 

Pick the team with a defense and a semi-functional QB. Profit.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on October 07, 2012, 05:30:25 PM
Wow, look at the NFC West.  49'ers are deadly and the Cards and Seahawks are quite respectable.  Hell, even St. Louis is showing signs of life.

Falcons and Texans, talk about tough, resilient teams.  5-0 start is the best in franchise history for Atlanta.  Ryan, Jones, Turner, White, man what weapons!

Had the misfortune to watch the Titans.  God, what a trainwreck.  They excel in no facet of the sport.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Jimbo on October 07, 2012, 05:54:40 PM
Wow Bears are 4 and 1, now if Cutler can stay healthy.

Not liking the Thursday Night Football, since Time Warner doesn't even carry it, hell it saves me money anyway, I'm working every other weekend so it isn't like I can watch them regularly.  Plus it never fails, I'll be working and put the game on and we get a flood of patients all watching some crazy shit about housewives or ancient aliens.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 08, 2012, 12:25:39 PM
Sundays are just making me say "MOTHERFUCKER" over and over again.

Goddamnit, Packers, you can't hold a fucking 4 minute lead against a rookie QB on a rebuilding team? What... the... fuck? Or for that matter, you can't blow out a team you spent the first half dominating so hard you were up 21-3? I know Greg Jennings is out and Benson, Finley and Raji got hurt but FUCK ME. You seriously think you can contend looking like this shit? Great, you have a pass rush again, too bad you can't fucking cover ANYBODY. Or for that matter, protect your goddamn Future Hall of Fame QB long enough for him to make a goddamn pass.

Kansas City... you stay classy, you rampant shitpile of complete cockgobbling douchebags. Way to inspire your team to play their asses off for you, by howing cheers of derision on your QB that just got his clock cleaned and is writing on the ground with a fucking concussion. Did you just switch fanbases with the Eagles or the Browns, FFS? I may not be able to root for the Chiefs anymore. Also, it's Brady Quinn time. Not that he's going to do any better than Cassel because let's face it, this team has weapons but can't seem to use them worth a shit. Joe Flacco is not an elite QB and this game is exactly why I feel that way. 3 FG's against the CHIEFS, who turned the ball over 4 fucking time? That's not just good defense on the Chiefs' part, that's you being an inconsistent overrated douche.

The fucking Patriots offense absolutely OWNS Denver. I mean, it's insane how badly they got run the fuck over by that Pats offense, and it wasn't even Brady that much. They RAN THE BALL RIGHT DOWN YOUR THROAT and it was over. The fact that your HOF QB got you back within striking distance only shows how good he is even with a somewhat suspect offensive scheme and a fumbler running back. Also, fire your offensive coordinator, since the only time your offense works well is when Peyton is calling plays from the line of scrimmage instead of this dink and dunk shit the OC keeps feeding him from the sidelines.

RGIII killed me in fantasy football. I kept falling in and out of sleep in that game, but hand off hand off hand off did me no fucking good. Too bad he got slobberknockered when he should have slid. Also, too bad Kirk Cousins couldn't get a clean pocket enough to not miss his wideouts. He looked good despite the 2 picks but he's no RGIII.

Saints win. Still not a good team. San Diego still finds ways to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Can we seriously get Norv Turner back into an OC job instead of HC?

Both the Bears and Vikings are 4-1, which means the Packers are going to have a helluva time getting into the playoffs unless they get their shit together. The Vikes aren't that good, and the Bears will have some WTF games down the line, which gives me hope. But the Pack has got to get their shit straight.

What the hell Giants? Are you just trying to be assholes? Why spot the Browns 17 points? Is this a game of kick the retard by letting him get a few shots in before you give him an atomic wedgie and smear his face with honey and ants?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sir T on October 08, 2012, 12:31:53 PM
He shure uses werds purdy.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 08, 2012, 12:47:35 PM
Baltimore confuses me. You have Ray Rice, a RB who was averaging 6 yards a carry in the game, and you only ran him 17 times. Meanwhile, you have a QB who's visually struggling, and you drop back to pass 31 times. Now, I'm not offensive coordinator, but it seems to me that when you're grinding down the opposition, you go with the hot hand on the ground.

Apparently Baltimore doesn't believe in ground and pound when they have the advantage up front.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on October 08, 2012, 01:11:16 PM
San Diego still finds ways to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. Can we seriously get Norv Turner back into an OC job instead of HC?

What, are you saying it wasn't a good idea to take out Ryan Mathews for Ronnie Brown on the final drive when you're trying to make a comeback?  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 08, 2012, 01:12:55 PM
Goddamnit, Packers, you can't hold a fucking 4 minute lead against a rookie QB on a rebuilding team? What... the... fuck? Or for that matter, you can't blow out a team you spent the first half dominating so hard you were up 21-3? I know Greg Jennings is out and Benson, Finley and Raji got hurt but FUCK ME. You seriously think you can contend looking like this shit? Great, you have a pass rush again, too bad you can't fucking cover ANYBODY. Or for that matter, protect your goddamn Future Hall of Fame QB long enough for him to make a goddamn pass.

On the plus side, Randall Cobb continues to improve and look like he will be a serious contributor in the future.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on October 08, 2012, 01:27:07 PM
Kansas City... you stay classy, you rampant shitpile of complete cockgobbling douchebags. Way to inspire your team to play their asses off for you, by howing cheers of derision on your QB that just got his clock cleaned and is writing on the ground with a fucking concussion. Did you just switch fanbases with the Eagles or the Browns, FFS? I may not be able to root for the Chiefs anymore. Also, it's Brady Quinn time. Not that he's going to do any better than Cassel because let's face it, this team has weapons but can't seem to use them worth a shit. Joe Flacco is not an elite QB and this game is exactly why I feel that way. 3 FG's against the CHIEFS, who turned the ball over 4 fucking time? That's not just good defense on the Chiefs' part, that's you being an inconsistent overrated douche.

Remember being at a Cardinals game (when they played at Sun Devil) back in the 90s when Kent Graham was QB, got hurt, and then the crowd, similar to what happened in KC  over the weekend, erupted deliriously at the prospects of his replacement (which happened to be Jake Plummer, waiting in the wings, who played many a game on that very field and let the home team to the Rose Bowl in college campaign). It was a sickening sensation for me, and surprising, considering that half the stadium (or more) was filled with Giants fans (no longer an occurrence in Glendale U. of Phoenix stadium).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on October 08, 2012, 01:27:53 PM
Baltimore confuses me. You have Ray Rice, a RB who was averaging 6 yards a carry in the game, and you only ran him 17 times. Meanwhile, you have a QB who's visually struggling, and you drop back to pass 31 times. Now, I'm not offensive coordinator, but it seems to me that when you're grinding down the opposition, you go with the hot hand on the ground.

Apparently Baltimore doesn't believe in ground and pound when they have the advantage up front.

In Baltimore I think there is some psychological need to prove that Flacco is an "elite" QB or something.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 08, 2012, 01:31:08 PM
That's exactly it. That need to prove your QB is the next big thing. I saw it last year with Matt Ryan. Your OC gets a weapon like a Julio Jones and all of a sudden they are airing the shit out left and right all game, despite the fact that he's not throwing worth a shit, or that he's getting asspounded by the D line. I call it Mike Martz Syndrome. At least Ryan seems to have gotten his shit together this year. Flacco is just going to continue to have games like yesterday where he's just the left side of useless. Sanchez was a victim of it last year.

Take what the defense gives you is a dirty word to some OC's.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 08, 2012, 01:38:27 PM
I think he's a good QB. A think the term "elite" QB is probably the dumbest thing in a long time. Mostly because the "elite" QBs who won Super Bowls are now on struggling teams because <gasp> their defense sucks.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on October 08, 2012, 01:40:30 PM
I call it Mike Martz Syndrome.
Take what the defense gives you is a dirty word to some OC's.

Superbowl 36 says hello.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on October 08, 2012, 03:39:01 PM
I think he's a good QB. A think the term "elite" QB is probably the dumbest thing in a long time. Mostly because the "elite" QBs who won Super Bowls are now on struggling teams because <gasp> their defense sucks.


The term lost what little meaning it had when people were still doubting Eli even after he won a god damned superbowl. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if it comes into question again somehow, despite the fact he has two fucking rings. TWO.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Zetleft on October 08, 2012, 03:54:50 PM
All this talk of elite QBs I have to post this.  It's been making the rounds   :heart:

QBs Talkin Trash Facebook  (http://profootballmock.com/?p=4810)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on October 08, 2012, 03:56:57 PM
I think he's a good QB. A think the term "elite" QB is probably the dumbest thing in a long time. Mostly because the "elite" QBs who won Super Bowls are now on struggling teams because <gasp> their defense sucks.
The term lost what little meaning it had when people were still doubting Eli even after he won a god damned superbowl. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if it comes into question again somehow, despite the fact he has two fucking rings. TWO.
Doesn't mean he's an elite quarterback.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on October 08, 2012, 03:58:05 PM
I think he's a good QB. A think the term "elite" QB is probably the dumbest thing in a long time. Mostly because the "elite" QBs who won Super Bowls are now on struggling teams because <gasp> their defense sucks.

Whether or not it has much meaning, it seems to be the discussion of a hugely disproportionate amount of sports talk radio, and I think QBs and teams are buying into the hype.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on October 08, 2012, 04:09:10 PM
I call it Mike Martz Syndrome.
Take what the defense gives you is a dirty word to some OC's.

Superbowl 36 says hello.

Are you holding up a game where the winning QB had 145 passing yards as an argument in favor of "elite" QBs throwing downfield all the time? I need some more context here.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on October 08, 2012, 04:10:10 PM
I think he's a good QB. A think the term "elite" QB is probably the dumbest thing in a long time. Mostly because the "elite" QBs who won Super Bowls are now on struggling teams because <gasp> their defense sucks.
The term lost what little meaning it had when people were still doubting Eli even after he won a god damned superbowl. Hell I wouldn't be surprised if it comes into question again somehow, despite the fact he has two fucking rings. TWO.
Doesn't mean he's an elite quarterback.


Sure it does, John Clayton is the guy who harps on and on about elite QBs and he always counts Eli.  :why_so_serious:

It's a pointless distinction, I think.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 08, 2012, 04:22:27 PM
Eli could have ten rings and still not be "elite," because he's fucking Eli Manning. I'm pretty sure he doesn't care, though.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on October 08, 2012, 04:39:03 PM
Does everyone consider Peyton an elite QB?  Yes.  Eli has won twice as many Super Bowls ergo he's elite as well.  Sorry he has the Manningface, sorry he doesn't have a sparkling personality. Was Jim Kelly an elite QB?  He never won a Super Bowl but was in four.  Yes.  Dan Marino never won a Super Bowl.  Yes, both Hall of Famers.  Where is the cutoff?  Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl, but I don't know anyone who considers him an elite QB.

Long story short, if you call a QB 'elite' then others agree with you, he is.







Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on October 08, 2012, 04:49:57 PM
Even despite two disastrous games, he's 8-3 in the playoffs with numbers better than his career averages.  Right now, I'm not sure I'd pick any other quarterback with the game on the line in the 4th quarter.  Nothing seems to bother him.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on October 08, 2012, 05:19:02 PM
Does everyone consider Peyton an elite QB?  Yes.  Eli has won twice as many Super Bowls ergo he's elite as well.  Sorry he has the Manningface, sorry he doesn't have a sparkling personality. Was Jim Kelly an elite QB?  He never won a Super Bowl but was in four.  Yes.  Dan Marino never won a Super Bowl.  Yes, both Hall of Famers.  Where is the cutoff?  Trent Dilfer won a Super Bowl, but I don't know anyone who considers him an elite QB.

Long story short, if you call a QB 'elite' then others agree with you, he is.

How many others? I bet I can find someone somewhere to say Dilfer was elite.

It's pointless. To even have the conversation in the first place you have to agree on what elite even means in this context, which nobody will ever do.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 08, 2012, 08:32:25 PM
I think he's a good QB. A think the term "elite" QB is probably the dumbest thing in a long time. Mostly because the "elite" QBs who won Super Bowls are now on struggling teams because <gasp> their defense sucks.

Whether or not it has much meaning, it seems to be the discussion of a hugely disproportionate amount of sports talk radio, and I think QBs and teams are buying into the hype.

It's talked about on sportstalk radio because they are actively trolling their own audience for ratings and to fill time. It's a useless subjective distinction that means absolutely nothing. You can't ask if someone's won a ring, because that's a bianary answer, but if you ask if somebody is good? But no, good wasn't enough, then it became is he great? But no, great isn't fucking enough, so now is he elite? Next, when we get bored of that it will be, is he WORLD CLASS?!?!?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 08, 2012, 08:37:28 PM
I think elite is better than world class. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on October 08, 2012, 08:37:57 PM
Hall of Fame-caliber.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 08, 2012, 08:41:15 PM
 :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 08, 2012, 09:06:15 PM
I call it Mike Martz Syndrome.
Take what the defense gives you is a dirty word to some OC's.

Superbowl 36 says hello.

Are you holding up a game where the winning QB had 145 passing yards as an argument in favor of "elite" QBs throwing downfield all the time? I need some more context here.

I took it to mean that Mike Martz had the downfield QB and lost the game to a team that "took what the defense gave them" and won. And the winning QB only had 145 passing yards that game.

That's why I called it Mike Martz Syndrome. The feeling an OC has when he thinks his QB is elite and so makes the QB throw even when he can't hit the broad side of the barn. See Joe Flacco against KC or Mark Sanchez every 2 out of 3 games.

Sanchez was actually ok tonight. He was still Sanchez so he threw passes in bad places and they got tipped and picked. JJ Watt is a motherfucking beast.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 08, 2012, 09:07:48 PM
Gruden calling him JJ Swatt was very apropo.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 08, 2012, 09:09:47 PM
Seriously, Sanchez, try throwing the ball over your head instead of sidearm. Who the fuck are you, Kenny Stabler?

Also, QB's Facebook was fucking hysterical.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 08, 2012, 09:11:05 PM
Shocker, USC QB has terrible fundamentals. Film at 11.

I bet Barkley will be fine though.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Surlyboi on October 08, 2012, 10:21:27 PM
Fuck that JJ Watt guy.

At least the Jets didn't totally stink this week.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on October 08, 2012, 10:28:38 PM
I thought we had all finally agreed, against our better judgement, that Eli was an elite QB now.  Dude didn't just win two Superbowls, he won them heroically.  And the best thing about Eli is that he gives not a single fuck.

Hyperbole aside, I was the biggest doubter/hater out there, but with the game on the line, I'd take Eli over his brother, even when Peyton was in his prime.  Eli is clutch. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on October 09, 2012, 04:55:11 AM
http://profootballmock.com/?p=5020


Facebook style NFL QBs talking shit amongst themselves.

Under normal circumstances, I don't really care for these...but this one is hilarious. THe RGIII stuff almost made me have to buy a new keyboard. Drink with caution.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 09, 2012, 07:50:35 AM
Hyperbole aside, I was the biggest doubter/hater out there, but with the game on the line, I'd take Eli over his brother, even when Peyton was in his prime.  Eli is clutch. 

"Hyperbole aside... I'd take Eli over Peyton."

Yeah, okay.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on October 09, 2012, 07:59:17 AM
Hyperbole aside, I was the biggest doubter/hater out there, but with the game on the line, I'd take Eli over his brother, even when Peyton was in his prime.  Eli is clutch.  

"Hyperbole aside... I'd take Eli over Peyton."

Yeah, okay.

I think you can make the case.  Eli has two super bowls, and has more road playoff wins of any QB ever.  He is amazing in the 4th quarter, with 22 career 4th quarter comebacks, (including both super bowls).  Bottom line is that as Cyrrex stipulated "with the game on the line" Eli is about the best there is by the numbers.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 09, 2012, 08:03:33 AM
And Peyton has 36. (Fourth Quarter comebacks) Admittedly, Peyton has a few years on Eli.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on October 09, 2012, 08:09:20 AM
And Peyton has 36. Admittedly, Peyton has a few years on Eli.

Not to mention that Peyton is basically a .500 QB in the playoffs and has just one gaming winning drive in the playoffs.  I'm not saying Peyton isn't a hall of famer or something, just that I think it isn't a stretch at all to say that Eli has proven to be a better clutch QB.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 09, 2012, 08:19:39 AM
Hyperbole aside, I'll take the Houston or SF defense, let you pick any QB you want, and put you on the 20 with 1:30 left needing a FG to win.

I think the QB love is bullshit. SF dominated Eli in the 4th quarter and OT, and they lost the game because their special teams fumbled the ball back twice to the Giants in short fields.

Conversely, the Giants defense absolute shut down NE. They hadn't been held to less than 20 points in over 13 weeks. You expect me to believe that Eli as a QB was the reason the Giants won that game? What? Because they scored 21 points? If anything I can point to Tines as the difference maker. His 9 points on kicks were the difference between a Super Bowl and being out in the game against SF.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 09, 2012, 08:23:49 AM
I think I'd take the Seattle defense.  The defensive backs have some amazing talent.  With a few additions from a solid draft, this could be a dream defense for years to come if they can keep all of the players on the payroll.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on October 09, 2012, 08:25:36 AM
Hyperbole aside, I'll take the Houston or SF defense, let you pick any QB you want, and put you on the 20 with 1:30 left needing a FG to win.

I think the QB love is bullshit. SF dominated Eli in the 4th quarter and OT, and they lost the game because their special teams fumbled the ball back twice to the Giants in short fields.

Conversely, the Giants defense absolute shut down NE. They hadn't been held to less than 20 points in over 13 weeks. You expect me to believe that Eli as a QB was the reason the Giants won that game? What? Because they scored 21 points? If anything I can point to Tines as the difference maker. His 9 points on kicks were the difference between a Super Bowl and being out in the game against SF.

I'm not sure why it has to be one or the other.   The point is, put me on the 20 with a 1:30 left and I need a field goal, who do I want?  Even if I concede that defense is more important, that still doesn't mean I don't want Eli if I can have him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 09, 2012, 08:33:05 AM
Both Manning brothers will be in the HOF.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 09, 2012, 08:41:06 AM
And Peyton has 36. Admittedly, Peyton has a few years on Eli.

Not to mention that Peyton is basically a .500 QB in the playoffs and has just one gaming winning drive in the playoffs.  I'm not saying Peyton isn't a hall of famer or something, just that I think it isn't a stretch at all to say that Eli has proven to be a better clutch QB.

The playoff stuff gets especially weird, because unlike the season, it's one and out. And things like opposing defenses ability, and random shit like "HE MISSED IT" means a lot more.

Peyton has more clutch situations and game winning drives. If you want to keep it to playoffs, fine, whatever. But, overall Peyton is still far greater a QB and the stats side with him.

I'm not dissing Eli, he's a great QB.

Both Manning brothers will be in the HOF.

This.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 09, 2012, 08:46:50 AM
I'm not sure why it has to be one or the other.   The point is, put me on the 20 with a 1:30 left and I need a field goal, who do I want?  Even if I concede that defense is more important, that still doesn't mean I don't want Eli if I can have him.

My point is that it's a misconception. In that scenario, you want to be facing the Patriots, not the Niners. If you're facing the Niners, you're fucked if Eli is on the field. I watched it happen twice where Eli got owned and deserved to lose. Special "bus" teams saved them.

Pittsburgh, Baltimore, San Fran, and Houston. Best defenses in the league last year, no shock at all that they all have winning records, and I expect they will all be in the playoffs. New Orleans, New England, Green Bay, and Philly. Only half have winning records, and Philly is extremely questionable. All were the best offenses with top tier QBs. How many will make the playoffs this year?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 09, 2012, 09:13:06 AM
With all of this QB talk, I thought this might lighten the mood a bit.

(http://costaki.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/tebow-11.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on October 09, 2012, 09:28:30 AM
Both Manning brothers will be in the HOF.
Peyton will. Eli to me is the second coming of Phil Simms right now. Eli needs to play better in the regular season before I would consider him HoF material.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on October 09, 2012, 09:44:57 AM
I think you can make the case.  Eli has two super bowls, and has more road playoff wins of any QB ever.  He is amazing in the 4th quarter, with 22 career 4th quarter comebacks, (including both super bowls).  Bottom line is that as Cyrrex stipulated "with the game on the line" Eli is about the best there is by the numbers.
4th quarter comebacks are overrated. Yes the really good quarterbacks have a knack for them but you only need to look at Tim Tebow to realize how misleading they can be. In other words sometimes the comeback is needed cause your defense couldn't hold the lead. Often though it's cause you sucked for three quarters and now you have to make something happen before time runs out.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on October 09, 2012, 10:30:30 AM
(http://www.bubbybrister.com/images/main-meetbubby.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 09, 2012, 11:33:09 AM
Is that Bubby Brister?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 09, 2012, 11:34:56 AM
Is that Bubby Brister?

That's what I assumed... and it made me feel terrible that I knew that.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 09, 2012, 11:48:33 AM
Is that winning or losing the thread? 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on October 09, 2012, 11:50:06 AM
What am I missing about the picture's relevance?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 09, 2012, 12:30:46 PM
Brister was a Super Bowl QB (though a losing one). Other than that, I have no idea.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on October 09, 2012, 12:31:42 PM
He has 2 rings backing up Elway, which really has no relevance to the discussion at hand.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 09, 2012, 02:00:55 PM
Cushing is out for the season with a torn ACL (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8483657/houston-texans-brian-cushing-season-torn-acl).  That's a big fucking deal for the Texans, but they'll still be pretty decent without him. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 09, 2012, 02:09:41 PM
Their defense definitely got worse with Cushing out of there, but given a week or two to prepare the backup, yeah, they'll be fine. Let's face it, they'll walk to that division title with both Jacksonville and Tennessee being total ass and Indy rebuilding.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on October 10, 2012, 02:44:45 AM
Yeah, but that JJ Watt(s) guy is like having 4 Brian Cushings on your team.  Okay maybe not, but he's fucking good.

Back to Eli/Peyton:  I love Peyton Manning.  Not only a great quarterback and field general, but a decent and funny guy by all accounts.  But he chokes.  He shits his pants as often as not when in the playoffs, because he ends up outsmarting himself.  Tom Brady basically owns him.  Compare stats all you want, when the biggest games are on the line, I lose faith in Peyton.  His brother?  Could give a fuck about Tom fucking Brady.  Finds a way to win those games.  Eli has the better defense right now, but Peyton has had better teams overall with the Colts.  Peyton should have at least 3 SBs by now, considering the teams he has been on and the situations he's been in.  Eli should have zero.

Truth be told, I would pick Peyton as my regular season QB, and then I would bench him in favor of Eli as soon as the playoffs came around.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 10, 2012, 07:03:25 AM
I guess you're right. I mean Peyton did miss that critical field goal, and Eli did have that magnificent "helmet catch" that he threw to himself.

I'll clarify instead of just being flippant. So much rides on everything firing on all cylinders to get through the playoffs. Through the Dungy years, the Colts enjoyed home field advantage/first round bye through much of that, and often did not play starters the last week of the season, so they would go upwards of 3 weeks of not playing. It's been discussed quite extensively if that is a good move. They year they won, they had to play in the wildcard round. They had to fight for it.

Basically, the season and to more of an extent, the post season is a team effort. One man can not win in the post season. That's why it's important to look at the play overall rather than saying "Hey, Eli has more rings, CLEARLY HE IS BETER". You said Eli is more clutch, but that still doesn't pan out as Peyton has more come backs and fourth quarter drives. Also saying 'they lost because they choked" belittles the teams that they lost to, most often the friggin Patriots of the 2000s, the most consistent and complete team over the last 12 years. Peyton is a better quarterback than Brady, but BARELY, but the Patriots were always a better team.

Peyton and Brady will be in the hall one day for sure, and I hope Eli is there too, he deserves it as well.

And the reason that Peyton "cares" about Brady is because they've faced each other in so many games that were critical and great games. That builds the rivalry. There really isn't any QB rivalries to be had in the NFC over the last decade or so. There's probably been nothing like Brady/Manning really. Hell, as much as I like Eli, he's not even the best QB in the NFC.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 10, 2012, 09:10:57 AM
Peyton has more passing yards than Elway. He's third on the all-time list and still playing. The only guy higher that's not in the HOF yet is Favre, and he will be.

Eli's 5 years and 27,000 yards behind his brother. Rings don't make you a hall of famer in my opinion. Drew Bledsoe isn't in yet. Jim Plunkett has 2 super bowl rings and will never get in the Hall.

Eli has a long way to go if he wants to get in the discussion. Guys like Collins, Brees, Rothlesburger, and Brady will also have something to say if he's up for consideration. Even McNabb and Hasselbeck will have a case if Eli gets in.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 10, 2012, 09:20:29 AM
Eli is a million light years away from Plunkett in terms of overall effectiveness, although it really is a travesty that Plunkett isn't in the HOF.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 10, 2012, 09:33:13 AM
Eli is a million light years away from Plunkett in terms of overall effectiveness, although it really is a travesty that Plunkett isn't in the HOF.

Did you watch Plunkett play?  He wasn't all that impressive for much of his career.  (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/P/PlunJi00.htm)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 10, 2012, 09:40:52 AM
You have your "serious scientist" hat on today, don't you?   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 10, 2012, 10:51:45 AM
This week's NFL picks are killing me.  Some very tough games to call...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 10, 2012, 10:57:25 AM
Which ones are you having trouble with?  Most of them seemed pretty cut and dry to me (but remember, I'm terrible at predicting winners). 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on October 10, 2012, 10:58:54 AM
This week's NFL picks are killing me.  Some very tough games to call...

 :oh_i_see:

You who is in full command of the Yahoo! pick'em. I don't even read the names of who is playing who... I just randomly click off the list.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on October 10, 2012, 10:43:17 PM
This week's NFL picks are killing me.  Some very tough games to call...

 :oh_i_see:

You who is in full command of the Yahoo! pick'em. I don't even read the names of who is playing who... I just randomly click off the list.  :awesome_for_real:

I think this season Nebu has figured out how to somehow make his picks after the games have been played.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 14, 2012, 11:56:34 AM
I guess it's a good thing for the boys of Cow that Romo has only thrown one interception.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on October 14, 2012, 01:25:35 PM
The cowboys do not understand how the game clock works it seems.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 14, 2012, 02:33:02 PM
<cackle>

Even if the Giants lose, this has been a delicious football weekend for me.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 14, 2012, 02:50:59 PM
Cowboys are just really bad this year. Until Romo goes away and Jerry keels over dead, I have no hopes of this team being relevant.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 14, 2012, 04:23:20 PM
:heart: best football weekend ever :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 14, 2012, 04:41:07 PM
Eat a dick, Massholes!

Whew. I think I paced 2 miles in the last 3 minutes of that game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 14, 2012, 04:47:10 PM
I was jazzed to see the final score for that game, because fuck the Patriots.


Man, I hate an awful lot of teams in football. Why is my heart so black?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on October 14, 2012, 05:05:25 PM
Man, I hate an awful lot of teams in football. Why is my heart so black?
(http://i.imgur.com/RpNlo.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on October 14, 2012, 05:34:13 PM
Lions!  Jason Hansen hits 4/4 FG, including the winner in OT.  Hell, even their defense put in a respectable showing; Avril gets two sacks and even the secondary got two picks.  Sure Vick hands out picks like Halloween candy, but hey.

Plus, 49'ers and Pats lose.   It's pretty hard to figure out the teams behind Houston and Atlanta.  Falcons 6-0!  Great offensive weapons.

Cowboys can eat spotted owl dick. 

Seattle is for realz yo.  What a defense! And good on you, Browns, for pulling out a win.  Even a blind pig gets an acorn once in a while.  :grin:



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on October 14, 2012, 05:53:17 PM
The Ravens D was already bad this year - losing potentially both Webb (ACL) and Lewis (Triceps) for the season is going to be hysterically awful.  Thankfully for the Ravens though, the AFC North has decided to completely suck ass this season and become the new NFC West, so they'll still probably make the playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 14, 2012, 05:58:59 PM
Man, I hate an awful lot of teams in football. Why is my heart so black?
(http://i.imgur.com/RpNlo.jpg)

:why_so_serious: :why_so_serious: :why_so_serious:


My other Giants are LOSING right now. If they had a Coughlin, I'd demand he be fired right about now.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on October 14, 2012, 08:23:08 PM
IF they had Coughlin, they'd be WINNING.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 14, 2012, 08:48:51 PM
Eat a dick, Massholes!

Whew. I think I paced 2 miles in the last 3 minutes of that game.

Your team is actually looking pretty damned decent this year.  One of the TV talking heads predicted they were going to the Superbowl prior to this year's start (I can't remember who) but that looks like not a totally unreasonable prediction.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 15, 2012, 09:18:27 AM
Man, dis season! Anyone that tells you they know what's going to happen is a goddamn liar.

Fuck the Jets. Seriously. Greene finally shows up to play though to be fair, it was against the fucking Colts. Only why couldn't Green Bay run this kind of train on the Colts instead of Sanchize?

Since the Fail Mary, I am legally obligated to hate the fucking Seahawks but since both teams can't lose, FUCK THE PATRIOTS. They are tied with the MIAMI DOLPHINS for fuck's sake (though they have the tie breakers). I guess Russel Wilson can throw the ball when you let him, huh? Sucks to be Matt Flynn. Wonder where he's going to get traded to in the off season because Seattle sure as fuck isn't going to pay a backup that kind of money when a rookie beats the Pats.

Oh AFC North - how much more can you suck? We will find out because losing Webb AND Lewis on that Ravens defense is going to tank this team. Well, not tank exactly because let's face it, their division is really a bunch of chumps including the Steelers. The Bengals got figured out by the goddamn Browns and the Steelers defense coudln't stop the goddamn Titans. I'm sure the Ravens will find a way to suck it really hard (most likely on the road where Flacco can't throw for shit) and only get 11 or 12 wins out of the season so they won't lose the division, but it's going to be a really painful season for the Ravens. You almost lost to the COWBOYS for fuck's sake. And they stink on ice.

The NFC East might actually be one of the most entertaining divisions in football right now. The Cowboys are terrible and will make .500 easy enough simply on their good games but their bad games will eat them alive. The Eagles - god this is a shitty shit shit team of overpriced failupwards-es. LeSean McCoy is the only consistently great player on this team. Jackson and Vick both have really high highs and really low lows and that defense is unpredictable as hell. The Lions have shown they really aren't able to do shit - I mean, they get a running game and all of a sudden Stafford can't throw the ball until the final quarter? The fuck?

As for the Redskins, if it wasn't for Dan Synder being a colossal rich asshole, I'd be rooting for this team. RG III is just fun as fuck to watch, like a young Mike Vick without the turnovers, sneering attitude or dog killing (we hope). They need to get more consistent on defense but their quarterback is an absolute franchise rebuilder. The Vikings showed who they really are and will likely be the rest of the season - an improved team, but not a good one. And the Giants - well, the Super Bowl Giants showed up yesterday against San Fran, but game 1 of this season showed they are a Jeykll and Hyde team too. Eli, however, continues to impress me. They may not have scored a lot of TD's yesterday, but they moved the ball. This division should be theirs if they don't shoot themselves in the foot.

GO PACK! In my wildest dreams, I didn't expect this Packers team to do shit against the Texans, even without Cushing. My boy Rodgers throws SIX GODDAMN TOUCHDOWNS I WILL HAVE YOUR MANBABIES!!!!!! This and the Seahawks game is making me think that even though Houston is the best team in the AFC, they still don't measure up to the 4th or 5th team in the NFC. Houston has a lot riding on their game against Baltimore next weekend. Best news for Green Bay is their next 3 games are against St. Louis (better but beatable), Jacksonville (dogshit) and Arizona (not as good as 4-2 would suggest) before a bye. So all the injuries they are taking shouldn't hurt them too bad. But that was a shitload of injuries. Did it look like everybody was slipping and sliding on that turf, because that was a shitload of knee injuries to have to deal with in one game?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 15, 2012, 09:20:03 AM
I know what's going to happen-  the Packers are going back to the Superbowl.  And Randall Cobb is going to be the MVP of the Superbowl.  

Also, RGIII is a good kid.  He's not going to be killing any dogs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on October 15, 2012, 10:10:30 AM
I know what's going to happen-  the Packers are going back to the Superbowl.  And Randall Cobb is going to be the MVP of the Superbowl.  

Also, RGIII is a good kid.  He's not going to be killing any dogs.

Nope. Just underage prostitutes.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 15, 2012, 10:18:36 AM
After looking at the Cowboys schedule I still think they could end up at 9-7 or 10-6, and that could very likely put them in the playoffs. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on October 15, 2012, 10:33:07 AM
This season just makes no sense.  I think half the players were just phoning it in with the replacement refs and are having trouble wrapping their head around the fact that this shit is now for reals or something.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2012, 10:55:23 AM
After looking at the Cowboys schedule I still think they could end up at 9-7 or 10-6, and that could very likely put them in the playoffs. 

Disagree. The team has line issues on both sides of the ball, a fuckup WR, a schizo QB, and a head coach that makes Les Miles look competant at clock management. I think their schedule is full of landmines.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 15, 2012, 11:00:44 AM
Sure, they could turn into a complete dumpster fire.  But full of potholes is different than "holy shit they're fucked".  I can see them beating Carolina, the Giants, Washington (home), Philly (home), Cleveland, Bungles, Saints.  The Giants/Washington/Philly games will be crucial to their success.  I can also see them pulling out Philly (away), Washington (away) and Pittsburgh (home).  It's still possible to salvage a decent season.  The next four games will tell us what we're getting, though.  If they do .500 or better in the next four I can still see them in the playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 15, 2012, 02:31:32 PM
The Cowboys do not beat the Giants when the Cowboys are playing them at home. Science Fact.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 15, 2012, 02:36:52 PM
Hmm (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010111408/2010/REG10/cowboys@giants#menu=highlights&tab=recap).   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2012, 02:51:13 PM
Giants fans have very short memories. It's why they always want to fire Coughlin.

Science fact.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on October 15, 2012, 02:52:01 PM
Giants fans have very short memories. It's why they always want to fire Coughlin.

Science fact.

Giants fans are just Yankees fans looking for something to do when there's no baseball manager to talk about firing.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2012, 02:54:54 PM
Yankees fans need to worry about filling their stadium.  :why_so_serious:

http://sports.yahoo.com/news/no-show--yankees-try-to-disguise-empty-seats-at-alcs-by-moving-fans.html


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 15, 2012, 03:46:51 PM
Hmm (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2010111408/2010/REG10/cowboys@giants#menu=highlights&tab=recap).   :oh_i_see:

I meant when the Cowboys are at home, not the Giants. I thought this was obvious and needed no further clarification, given I knew the Giants lost to the Cowboys in NJ already. :P


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 15, 2012, 03:50:26 PM
Oh, I gotcha.  Sorry, I'm a bit sleepy from the new baby.  I probably should have figured that out.

Yeah, 2008 was the last time that happened I believe.  Hopefully it will never happen again.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 15, 2012, 03:51:39 PM
Yeah, they haven't beaten the Giants in their new stadium yet, something that gives me great joy.  :heart:


EDIT: Also! I am not a Yankees fan, so nyah. I only root for teams named "Giants," apparently.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 15, 2012, 03:54:15 PM
I think I am too, Sjofn.  My wife spent some of her youth in SF and is a big SF Giants fan.  I like Eliface and the NY Giants pretty well too (although when I really start pulling for them they suck). 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 15, 2012, 04:10:25 PM
Yeah, I pretty much adopted the SF Giants because of Ingmar, otherwise my indifference towards baseball would still be in effect. My dad IS a Yankees fan, though, so I guess if I suddenly decided to care about baseball in the Before Ingmar times, I probably would've picked them. Because the Mets are for Jets fans.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Surlyboi on October 15, 2012, 04:36:35 PM
Yeah, I pretty much adopted the SF Giants because of Ingmar, otherwise my indifference towards baseball would still be in effect. My dad IS a Yankees fan, though, so I guess if I suddenly decided to care about baseball in the Before Ingmar times, I probably would've picked them. Because the Mets are for Jets fans.

Fuck that, I hate the Jankees and the Mets. Fuck the Giants too, both football and baseball.

My teams are the Jets, the 'Niners and the Red Wings.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 15, 2012, 05:00:02 PM
As long as you don't like a Philadelphia team, we can probably still be friends.

Probably.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Surlyboi on October 15, 2012, 05:10:25 PM
New Yorker first, BA resident second. Nothing good comes out of philly except the concept of cheese steaks.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 15, 2012, 05:27:35 PM
Exactly. Fuck those guys.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 15, 2012, 05:55:41 PM
I like the '76ers.  Moses Malone and Dr. J were bad motherfuckers.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Surlyboi on October 15, 2012, 06:14:54 PM
Yes, they were indeed bad motherfuckers. Too bad the last time any of them did anything was 20 years ago.  :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 15, 2012, 06:26:56 PM
The '76ers haven't had any star power (excepting a year or two of Iverson) that I've particularly cared for since then.  Dr. J had so much style it was oozing off of him.  I'd love to see them get someone flashy again. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on October 15, 2012, 06:46:24 PM
I like Jimmy Rollins. But then, he's from Oakland REALLY.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 15, 2012, 07:24:10 PM
They've got a nice pitching roster


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2012, 08:25:41 PM
Watching SD melt down and Rivers continue to suck is delicious.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 15, 2012, 08:37:46 PM
Wow.  Four interceptions is pretty spectacular.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2012, 08:39:36 PM
35 unanswered. Denver got up off the mat at halftime and kicked the entire SD team straight in the nuts, courtesy of 4 picks by Rivers and 3 TDs by Peyton Manning.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 15, 2012, 08:45:04 PM
Payton may be old, but he's still got a little something going on.  How many times have we seen ancient quarterbacks go to a new team and struggle mightily trying to adapt either to a new scheme or to adapt the new players to their style?  I'm very impressed with what I've seen out of PM this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 15, 2012, 08:46:35 PM
LOLNorv.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2012, 08:47:40 PM
Give a lot of credit to the Denver pass rush and their secondary jumping routes. They made the difference.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 15, 2012, 09:07:31 PM
Yeah, Denver's got a good team.  Manning's not the only thing they have going for them, but I'm still impressed with the dude.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 15, 2012, 09:42:17 PM
Good ol' Norvelous Norv.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on October 16, 2012, 07:48:58 AM
(http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/002/678/547/hi-res-154187791_display_image.jpg?1350367424)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on October 16, 2012, 07:55:01 AM
Well, I really turned this off at pretty much exactly the wrong moment.  When I went to sleep I think it was 24-7.  Missed a great ending, but at least I got a lot of sleep.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 16, 2012, 07:58:26 AM
The Norv thing is unfair in this case. Rivers singlehandedly lost this game.

In the beginning of the second half, they drive all the way down the field, and Rivers gets a sack fumble that goes the distance for a defensive score. Sacked again next possession to go 3 and out. Then, interception, interception, interception that goes for 6, then two sacks in a set of downs and a fumble to end the game.

Honestly, every single bad thing can be traced to Rivers completely losing the handle. If they just kick a FG instead of turning the ball over in the 3rd quarter, it's a 10 point swing, and SD wins. The 3 picks in the 4th quarter is a qb going out there and wetting the bed.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on October 16, 2012, 08:01:42 AM
So more appropriately:

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/A5TIakACAAA-sH-.png)

Either way I'm happy even though I lost at fantasy because Peyton manninged it up.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 16, 2012, 08:08:02 AM
The only real assessment you need about Rivers is 4 interceptions and lost 2 fumbles, one of which was returned for a TD.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 16, 2012, 09:14:21 AM
This is just fucking creepy as hell.   :ye_gods:

 
(http://ksr.wpengine.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/feeling-him-up-10-15-121.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 16, 2012, 09:19:46 AM
The Norv thing is unfair in this case. Rivers singlehandedly lost this game.

In the beginning of the second half, they drive all the way down the field, and Rivers gets a sack fumble that goes the distance for a defensive score. Sacked again next possession to go 3 and out. Then, interception, interception, interception that goes for 6, then two sacks in a set of downs and a fumble to end the game.

Honestly, every single bad thing can be traced to Rivers completely losing the handle. If they just kick a FG instead of turning the ball over in the 3rd quarter, it's a 10 point swing, and SD wins. The 3 picks in the 4th quarter is a qb going out there and wetting the bed.

I'm goign to have to call bullshit to a degree. Two of those interceptions were good reads by the Defense. Rivers melted down, but Broncos D waking up in the second half deserves a lot of credit. Hell, there were at least two other INTs that were left on the ground. Carter needs more playing time, he looked fucking fantastic.

I have not been this happy about a game since The Drive. Thrilling. Just as SD started imploding, Broncos started firing on all cylinders. Now, PLAY LIKE THAT ALL THE TIME, K, THANKS.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on October 16, 2012, 09:26:46 AM
Norv could've made some better adjustments 2nd half but his players still have to make plays.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 16, 2012, 09:28:29 AM
I do want to point out that the Chargers did not exactly play great in the first half either. We held them to three and out initially and gave them the ball twice in the red zone, and only gave up 10 points.

The Broncos Special Teams were the prime reason for Chargers early success. And a rookie who doesn't know how to run a hook route.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 16, 2012, 09:33:31 AM
When the Broncos D wakes up, it is a powerful thing. I didn't watch the game last night and it sounds like I missed a historic meltdown/comeback. Rivers doing his best Mike Vick impression is hilarious. That San Diego team has consistently found ways to underachieve for years and yet Turner has kept his job.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on October 16, 2012, 09:35:55 AM
I do want to point out that the Chargers did not exactly play great in the first half either. We held them to three and out initially and gave them the ball twice in the red zone, and only gave up 10 points.

The Broncos Special Teams were the prime reason for Chargers early success. And a rookie who doesn't know how to run a hook route.
That's right, the Chargers O only had one "unassisted" score, a 66 yard TD drive.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on October 16, 2012, 11:35:54 AM
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/10/jimmy_haslam_is_new_cleveland.html

Welp... here we go again Cleveland. At this rate, we'll be rebuilt by 2030. BRING IN THE CHIN!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 16, 2012, 12:27:00 PM
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/10/jimmy_haslam_is_new_cleveland.html

Welp... here we go again Cleveland. At this rate, we'll be rebuilt by 2030. BRING IN THE CHIN!

You mean the Los Angeles Browns, of course.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on October 16, 2012, 01:04:51 PM
http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2012/10/jimmy_haslam_is_new_cleveland.html

Welp... here we go again Cleveland. At this rate, we'll be rebuilt by 2030. BRING IN THE CHIN!

You mean the Los Angeles Browns, of course.

LMAO. Well 2030 is the first year they are free from their "lease." I'd hope by then LA would already have a team.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on October 16, 2012, 01:26:33 PM
The Norv thing is unfair in this case.

Bullshit.  Chargers get the ball in the second half with the score 24-7, and Norv the Supergenius proceeds to call 28 passes vs 10 runs for the rest of the game.  Number of touches Ryan Mathews had in the fourth quarter: 2.  Number of touches Ronnie Brown had in the fourth quarter: 4.  Norv Turner is a shitastic coach.

Edit: To be clear, Rivers sucks too.  That's why you don't call 3 times as many passes as runs while trying to protect a lead when Rivers is your QB.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 16, 2012, 02:05:17 PM
I call bullshit on your bullshit. (Can I do that? Double negative bullshit? GOING FOR IT!)

They called 5 runs in the first drive after the half before Rivers got sacked. Those runs went for a total of 21 yards. After a first and 10 run for 2, maybe you can blame him for not running again there, but at that point you're going for the TD. They miss a pass, and set up 3rd and 8. That's when the sack-fumble-TD happened to make it 24-14.

The next drive Matthews goes for 1 on a run. He goes for 4 on a screen. You have a 3rd and 5. You have to pass there. Of course the shitty line gets Rivers sacked. They punt.

Now you're in chaos mode only up by 3, and you've had 2 possessions. They were screening to Matthews like crazy. The runs were getting stuffed. Denver was DARING them to run the ball because they knew they wanted to work the clock. They had single coverage on the outside. Rivers just fucking blew it, over and over again.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 16, 2012, 03:11:06 PM
Wait, who is calling who on who's bullshit?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 16, 2012, 03:15:03 PM
I'm calling bullshit on Paelos, just because I like the idea of him spending 20 minutes behind the scenes coming up with some sort of random statistic to prove his point.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 16, 2012, 03:23:39 PM
I'm calling bullshit on Paelos, just because I like the idea of him spending 20 minutes behind the scenes coming up with some sort of random statistic to prove his point.   :grin:

BULLSHIT!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 16, 2012, 09:04:38 PM
Mike Holmgren out in Cleveland (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8511711/mike-holmgren-retire-cleveland-browns-sale-official).

Juan Castillo out as Defensive Coordinator in Philly (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8511166/juan-castillo-fired-philadelphia-eagles).

The first won't really pay any dividends for years, nor will we know until probably a year from now if any of the moves Holmgren made (like drafting Weedon) were good. The second won't matter much to that team unless the DC slathers Mike Vick in anti-turnover sauce.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 17, 2012, 06:19:42 AM
I'm calling bullshit on Paelos, just because I like the idea of him spending 20 minutes behind the scenes coming up with some sort of random statistic to prove his point.   :grin:

Pfft, try 5. I have stats open at all times.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 17, 2012, 06:38:37 AM
I have this feeling that you sit around and do stats while rubbing one out.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on October 17, 2012, 09:12:33 AM
Mike Holmgren out in Cleveland (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8511711/mike-holmgren-retire-cleveland-browns-sale-official).

Juan Castillo out as Defensive Coordinator in Philly (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8511166/juan-castillo-fired-philadelphia-eagles).

The first won't really pay any dividends for years, nor will we know until probably a year from now if any of the moves Holmgren made (like drafting Weedon) were good. The second won't matter much to that team unless the DC slathers Mike Vick in anti-turnover sauce.

Yes but there is one glaring black mark in the McCoy pick. That was the solely Walrus's call.

I sorta like the fact that we got a guy who knows American football better than the rest of the World football. He has some experience being a Steelers minority owner and has a lot of pull around the league in knowing front office personnel - which sadly the Lerner's had very little of. Cautiously optimistic about this...in 3 years. But then again, that is the M.O. for Cleveland fans every year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 18, 2012, 10:28:00 AM
Looks like the Jets may play Tebow at RB this weekend.  That's actually pretty damned smart.  I suspect he would be a decent RB, although not a primary option.  And he throws just well enough you could throw in a wrinkle or two when it really counted and have him throw. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 18, 2012, 10:36:58 AM
Looks like the Jets may play Tebow at RB this weekend.  That's actually pretty damned smart. 

No lateral quickness and tall.  Bad decision. 

Either you train him to play QB and work on his release, or you feed him like crazy and teach him to be a TE.  Other than that, the guy has no role beyond special teams. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 18, 2012, 10:44:37 AM
I'm talking about as a second or third string RB.  I don't have any illusions that he'd be Eric Dickerson.  He might also be a serviceable backup FB.  A agree that TE might be his best position though. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 18, 2012, 10:50:17 AM
A 6'3" FB. 

You may want to think about that for a bit.  Consider the size of your average RB and the purpose of a FB.   If you want a 6'3" FB, just get your second string tackle/defensive tackle to play the position (a la 'the Fridge').


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 18, 2012, 10:51:25 AM
They can gimmick this thing any way they want. It won't work.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on October 18, 2012, 10:56:38 AM
They can gimmick this thing any way they want. It won't work.

Let me start this by saying I'm not a Teblow fan.  I think he's a freak-show circus that sells tickets.

He did win a playoff game in Denver and right a sinking ship though.  I think he's a guy who has the innate ability to make the most of opportunities.

Which is why I checked to see if he was available on the waiver wire.   :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 18, 2012, 11:24:50 AM
He won a playoff game in Denver because Pittsburgh was and still is in a major decline defensively. They are now starting to hit the skids completely. I didn't think they would, and I was wrong about how fast they've tanked. It started with that game.

NE smoked him twice. Buffalo smoked him once. KC held him to 178 total yards across 2 games. When he needed just one win to clinch the playoffs, he lost 3 games in a row. He had to backdoor the division just to get a shot. Now he's on a Jets team that prides themselves on Defense, yet somehow has given up more rushing yards than everyone in the league except Buffalo, and 24 points a game on average.

Nothing can go right on the greasefire that is the Jets. They have a terrible USC QB (which in my mind is a deathknell before you even start), a rushing attack that can't get 4 yards a carry and has already fumbled 3 times, a kicker whose long is 39 yards, 2 RBs who are dealing with injuries, a questionable WR core, a non-existant pass rush, and a head coach that can't STFU. The only, and I mean ONLY thing they do really well is special teams returns.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 18, 2012, 11:26:21 AM
They can gimmick this thing any way they want. It won't work.

He did win a playoff game in Denver and right a sinking ship though.

No. He. Did. Not.

He/We got lucky, and for the last time, Matt Prater and the Defense/ST deserve a SHIT TON more credit to what happened last season than Tebow's anctics did. And again, we stumbled into the playoffs on a shitty schedule in a shitty division. We dropped the last three, including the last game to the Chiefs where he had a 2.1 QBR. TWO POINT ONE. Fuck Tebow.

Edit: Thank you Paelos.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 18, 2012, 11:29:37 AM
This is another one of those things that has been pounded into the ground around here.  I hate his religious idiocy, but I like his competitiveness on the field and he doesn't do stupid shit off the field.  And it's not like the Jets can get worse.  Might as well give it a shot and see how it goes.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on October 18, 2012, 11:34:15 AM
For those of you who have been graced with the Elways and Mannings of the world, you quickly forget what it's like to need a quarterback who won't lose a game for you.  Tebow did just that.

Fuck, Brad Johnson made a career and won a ring not losing games.

I bet Philly and SD would take a quarterback who doesn't lose games right now.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 18, 2012, 11:36:30 AM
I'm stuck with Romo. I know EXACTLY what it's like to need a QB that won't lose it for you.

I still wouldn't want Tebow. No football GM worth a damn would. The only reason he's on the Jets was to try to kickstart Sanchez. Anybody who thinks it made any actual "football" sense is a total loon.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on October 18, 2012, 11:49:49 AM
I don't get how calling Tebow a RB would actually change anything in the end.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 18, 2012, 11:53:32 AM
It's a gimmick.  To my mind it would be like a reverse Wildcat option, i.e. a running back that could throw.  It could never be their primary option. 

I think many people get their anger with Tebow on a personal level confused with Tebow the player.  I would imagine that he's probably a better teammate than many of these jackass QBs, including Cutler and Sanchez and Romo.  He just wasn't blessed with the ability to be an NFL quarterback. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on October 18, 2012, 11:56:14 AM
I'm stuck with Romo. I know EXACTLY what it's like to need a QB that won't lose it for you.

I still wouldn't want Tebow. No football GM worth a damn would. The only reason he's on the Jets was to try to kickstart Sanchez. Anybody who thinks it made any actual "football" sense is a total loon.

The point I'm trying to make is Tebow was at the helm of the offense when DEN started to put it together.  Yes, their defense improved and their running game got better.  But for people who stick their fingers in their ears and yell NO HE DI-INT, I think they're factually incorrect.

Ugh.  I hate UF and I'm not a big fan of Tebow.  How the fuck am I here defending him.  WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO MY LIFE?   :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 18, 2012, 12:21:42 PM
Compare what Tebow did in Denver to what a rehabbing Manning is doing in Denver and you'll see why I think Tebow has no place in the NFL (other than as a TE).  It's not even close.  Tebow is a pure athlete.  I love the guy for his enthusiasm and his drive but it takes TALENT to play at that level.  Tebow lacks the ability to see the game.  Playing a QB in college IS NOTHING LIKE the level of complexity in the NFL.  Tebow just doesn't have the decision making skills to allow his natural talent to show through at the NFL level.  Perhaps with time and proper mentoring he could get there... he's just nowhere near that now.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 18, 2012, 12:23:11 PM
I think he'll be a better backup running back with the threat of a pass than he was a QB.  I suspect that we'll see him at TE in the next year or two.  He'll be fucking murder to take down once he catches a ball. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on October 18, 2012, 12:38:25 PM
He's no Gronk.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 18, 2012, 12:58:10 PM
He has a better chance of being Gronk than he does of being Brady.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 18, 2012, 01:07:30 PM
He has a better chance of being Gronk than he does of being Brady Brad Johnson.

FIFY.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 18, 2012, 01:24:55 PM
For those of you who have been graced with the Elways and Mannings of the world, you quickly forget what it's like to need a quarterback who won't lose a game for you.  Tebow did just that.

Fuck, Brad Johnson made a career and won a ring not losing games.

I bet Philly and SD would take a quarterback who doesn't lose games right now.

Being a Denver fan, I know both of those now. :> (All three if we count Tebow.)

Tebow did not do that.

Here we go. Because you made me do this...


Now, he was thrilling, but the broncos defense kept the scores (aside from the patriots, because well, patriots do as the patriots do) close and allowed striking distance to win, including two wins by the clutch Prater.

The tricks work for a short time. Then good defenses realize what's going on and put a stop to it.

Tebow is not a good QB. He did not "right the ship". It was a fucking team effort. If they had gotten behind more, Tebow would have ended up with double digit INTs. You can say all you want about Tebow being awesome, but it pisses me the fuck off that everyone just glad hands him and ignores the other developments/keys to success.

He'll be even worse for the Jets if he ever starts.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 18, 2012, 01:29:03 PM
Aww shit, here we go.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on October 19, 2012, 05:59:16 AM
Man, I totally just got bold underline italiced.  I do believe I said the running game and the defense got its shit together earlier in the thread.   :oh_i_see:

I like that we say Tebow and it's as though we've entered the Politics forum though.   :drill:

In other news, sleeper this week is Josh Freeman...look for Schiano to really open up the Bucs passing game as we finally figure out that Vincent Jackson and Mike Williams are REALLY FUCKING GOOD SO THROW THEM THE BALL.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Xilren's Twin on October 19, 2012, 06:41:17 AM
Unrelated to anything, Sports Illustrated this week has an article on the Vikings Chris Kluwe, the WoW playing, fantasy miniature painting, most outspoken punter every.
That was a weird intersection of gaming and sports.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 19, 2012, 06:43:52 AM
Unrelated to anything, Sports Illustrated this week has an article on the Vikings Chris Kluwe, the WoW playing, fantasy miniature painting, most outspoken punter every.
That was a weird intersection of gaming and sports.

I have some friends up in Minny that are perpetually posting his opinion articles on Facebook.  They are usually a good read and he's usually right on target about social issues. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 19, 2012, 08:31:11 AM
Man, I totally just got bold underline italiced.  I do believe I said the running game and the defense got its shit together earlier in the thread.   :oh_i_see:

You said that Tebow righted the ship. I said that it was a team effort, and THEN you mentioned the running game and said that anti-tebowers are fooling themselves. Given I was the resident Broncos fan, and the one involved in the convo, I got annoyed.

I fully understand what it means to have a good QB, and plenty of shitty QBs (Griese/Freerote). Tebow is a circus act, like you said in the initial thing. Those of us that speak down on Tebow understand that and not what we wanted. Because we downplay anything he did as a QB is because we wanted an actual QB, and got tired of the Tebowites praising their savior. There are fucking people who still think we would be doing better with Tebow rather than Manning. I get annoyed when the Defense/ST and Prater don't get their credit in things.

In the end, I 100% stand by my statement that Tebow did not right the ship, that it was a team effort.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on October 19, 2012, 09:06:56 AM

There are fucking people who still think we would be doing better with Tebow rather than Manning.

 :ye_gods:



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 19, 2012, 09:07:51 AM
Jim Harbaugh is a whiny cunt.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on October 19, 2012, 09:09:41 AM
Jim Harbaugh is a whiny cunt.

haha, a cuntwhine

Anything in particular I should be reading about why he's a cuntwhine?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 19, 2012, 10:05:11 AM
Watch a game he coaches for ten minutes. You can't avoid seeing him crying into his clipboard.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Johny Cee on October 19, 2012, 10:29:02 AM
Watch a game he coaches for ten minutes. You can't avoid seeing him crying into his clipboard.

Didn't see Thursday's game, but I was complaining about this a couple pages ago.  Any flag comes out or call goes against him and you see him jawing on the sidelines like the refs are personally trying to take the food out of his kids' mouths.  My favorite is the challenge flag just to show how pissed he is, which he then loses.

It feels like theater in an attempt to influence either the audience or the refs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 19, 2012, 10:33:51 AM
I miss Shanahan trying to kill everyone with mind bullets. That's about the only thing I miss, mind you.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 19, 2012, 09:05:42 PM
Watch a game he coaches for ten minutes. You can't avoid seeing him crying into his clipboard.

Didn't see Thursday's game, but I was complaining about this a couple pages ago.  Any flag comes out or call goes against him and you see him jawing on the sidelines like the refs are personally trying to take the food out of his kids' mouths.  My favorite is the challenge flag just to show how pissed he is, which he then loses.

It feels like theater in an attempt to influence either the audience or the refs.

Judging from his conference calls with the opposing team's media (where he just mumbles a syllable or two, and never offers any follow ups or actual info), he is just a miserable fuck all round. A petulant child.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on October 19, 2012, 09:38:49 PM
He does that to the people covering the Niners too.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 19, 2012, 10:42:08 PM
I miss Shanahan trying to kill everyone with mind bullets. That's about the only thing I miss, mind you.

Coughlin is the cootiest coot out there. He has mind bullets, he has screaming obscenities, he has an amazing color-changing face, and he sometimes just looks like someone's pissy great uncle wandered onto the sideline and picked up a headset. He has it all, baby.

(http://cache.gawker.com/assets/images/11/2008/01/medium_TomCoughlin.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 21, 2012, 01:05:11 PM
Haha the Giants are so lucky.  :awesome_for_real:

Who doesn't cover Cruz with the game on the line? SHANANAHANAHAN


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on October 21, 2012, 01:11:32 PM
It was all skill, totally.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on October 21, 2012, 01:26:19 PM
I guess I'm getting old, because I  :heart: the old Tampa Bay 'creamsicle' uniforms.  Also, a thrilling end.  Freeman throws for 400+ yards?? How shit IS the 'taints defense?  What a fucked up ending.  On a penalty.

Good to see the Titans righting the ship.  The Jake Locker era is not quite here as Hasselbeck looks like a Tennessee Stud. Hope Locker doesn't get a sprain from holding the clipboard.  Chris Johnson runs for 195yds.  Against the Bills, but hey we'll take it. I'm not ready to declare CJ back to form though.   If the Titans can now fix their *ahem* POROUS defense, they might actually get a Wild Card. 





Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on October 21, 2012, 01:29:49 PM
The only reason that game (Giants/RedSkins) was even close, was because of all those 4th down conversions barely squeaking by, constantly.


The Giants Defense figured out the Redskins QB before the Redskins figured out you should cover Cruz.


No one ever remembers to cover Cruz though.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 21, 2012, 03:10:39 PM
Randall Cobb fucking shit up again for the Packers.   :awesome_for_real:

And yes, the creamsicle uniforms are the best ever created in any sport.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on October 21, 2012, 04:18:01 PM
Wooo boy the Ravens.  Thankfully, with my wife off for a spa day as a belated birthday present, that shitfest of a game made it easy to decide to be a responsible parent and take my kids to the park instead.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 21, 2012, 08:29:08 PM
(http://thedisneyblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Eli-Manning-at-Disney-2-s.jpg)

ELITE


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 22, 2012, 09:05:34 AM
Houston and Baltimore. Well I guess we know who the best team in the AFC is. Not that there was really a question in my mind. The Ravens defense is OLD and now it's OLD AND HURT. A lot. They couldn't stop anything yesterday even with Suggs back. But what's worse for them is their offense. Joe Flacco is good in Baltimore but he is DEATH on the road and the Texans proved it. The Ravens better hope they somehow sew up the #1 spot in the AFC because they are not going to beat Houston on the road unless Schaub is out again. The game was over before the second quarter.

New England and the Jets. Guess what? Both these teams are TERRIBLE. The Patriots offense is good but it ain't that good. The Pats defense is worse. They absolutely cannot stop the run. Luckily for them, the Jets are convinced that Mark Sanchez is a starting caliber NFL QB and continue to try to prove it to everyone. Perfect example came in the 4th quarter. Pats are up 23-17. The Jets have moved the ball mostly with runs, including a few key 3rd and 1 runs by Greene. The announcers keep pointing out that he's 6 for 6 on the year at 3rd and 1's. They get to the 4-yard line with a 3rd and 1. Do they run Greene, which is apparently a surefire first down? No. Do they even bother to bring Tebow in for a QB sneak or a wildcat bumble to get the first down. No. No, they put it in Sanchez's hands and their no-name receiver can't get enough separation on a slant to get the ball. Kick a field goal, lose in OT. The Pats may be the 3rd best team in the AFC but that ain't saying much. They have no real pass rush to speak of, can't stop the run and are horribly inconsistent.

Tennessee and Buffalo. I caught the last quarter of this game once they switched off the domination of the Texans. The Buffalo Bills should fire their D coordinator because as much money as they spent on the defensive side of the ball this year, they should be at least a top 10 defense. Instead, they can't stop ANYBODY. Hasselback looks like a world beater instead of the beaten up vet he is because the Bills can't cover anybody. And will someone tell Ryan Fitzpatrick his guys are the ones wearing blue jerseys? He has got to get the INT's down or they won't have a shot at the playoffs. Yes, they still have a shot at the playoffs, that's how bad the AFC is.

The Saints defense is perhaps the worst in the league. Luckily they have Drew Brees because otherwise, they'd be 0-6. Tampa's Orange Crush unis are clearly superior to their modern versions but the team still sucks.

Green Bay called, and they said, "Greg Who?" I expect Jennings will be gone next year, because Randall Cobb is #1/#2 level of talent. If James Jones continues to play like he has, I don't care when Jennings's groin heals because we don't need him. And Jordy Nelson really is #1 caliber, at least when Rodgers is on his game. Sure, it was against the Rams. Their next game is against Jacksonville with the potential of no Jones-Drew AND Chad Henne at QB. So let's chalk that up as a win.

Minnesota gets an ugly win. Ponder only has 58 yards passing? Well, when you have ALL-DAY PETERSON running behind you, I guess you don't need to throw the ball. Ponder has had better games and I suppose it's a measure of how good the Cardinals pass defense is that he had such a bad game. Too bad Arizona has no QB. Whether it's Kolb or Skelton under center, that team is still going to struggle. Both QB's have taken a combined 35 SACKS this year in 7 games. 5 sacks per game is not going to get many wins. The only good defenses they've played against are Seattle and Philly and apparently Minnesota (who are tied with Arizona for 3rd in sacks this year).

RGIII is so the real deal. I'm disappointed that game wasn't on my TV, it sounds like a fun one. I expect that next year, when the Skins have another draft under their belt and a year of seasoning on Griffin and Morris and a chance to fix their defense, they are going to be scary good. That division is going nowhere but down. Right now, it's the Giants division to lose because the Cowboys and Eagles are both horribly inconsistent and overrated. At least the Skins have an excuse to be 3-4.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on October 22, 2012, 09:33:33 AM
I was very pleased to see Brandon Weeden look the part of an NFL QB - especially after his first couple games and ESPECIALLY after T.Rich goes out.  Now, can we please FOR THE LOVE OF GOD GET SOMEONE WHO CAN FUCKING CATCH IT?!?!! Seriously, there is some kind of plague with the Browns' receivers and I blame Braylon for starting that shit up. Little and now Gordon dropping big throws. Amazing that the Browns could have/SHOULD HAVE A.J. Greene out there.... Thanks Heckert and Co. Gordon might still be good, but I can't recall receivers outside of the Browns with horrible drops like this, aside from an occasional Dez story.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 22, 2012, 10:57:20 AM
Green Bay called, and they said, "Greg Who?" I expect Jennings will be gone next year, because Randall Cobb is #1/#2 level of talent. If James Jones continues to play like he has, I don't care when Jennings's groin heals because we don't need him. And Jordy Nelson really is #1 caliber, at least when Rodgers is on his game. Sure, it was against the Rams. Their next game is against Jacksonville with the potential of no Jones-Drew AND Chad Henne at QB. So let's chalk that up as a win.

Hey, the Rams WERE 3-0 at home, with wins over Arizona, Seattle and Washington. Not the best team, obviously, but they've played well at home, which only reinforces how good the Packers SHOULD have been and possibly ARE.

The rest of their schedule has the opportunity of being rough with two games each with the vikings and Detroit to go. But they also have 5 home games, including jaguars, titans and cardinals.

With how crazy the NFC race seem to be turning into, and how well Minnesota is playing, I worry about them making the playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on October 22, 2012, 11:02:22 AM
Haemish, going into the game last night, the Patriots offense was the best in the league with YPG and scoring.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 22, 2012, 11:21:54 AM
Some of that is likely because of the curbstomping they gave to Buffalo (wasn't it like 600 passing yards and 52 points?) and Tennessee. I'm not saying they aren't good at times, but they are inconsistent. That team should have been able to do more than they did in the 4th quarter against a Jets team with no Revis, especially at home. No question they can light it up, but on the whole, I don't think they are as good as their numbers might indicate.

I worry about the Pack making the playoffs too, but I am buoyed by my opinion that the Vikings are not as good as their record indicates and the Bears are inconsistent as well - plus the Lions seem deadset on tanking this season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on October 22, 2012, 11:25:00 AM
Yeah I'm pretty sure games against Buffalo don't count.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 22, 2012, 11:37:08 AM
The Patriots haven't had a decent pass defense since 2009. It's no shock they've never won the big game in that stretch.

Let's get one thing straight. If the Jets catch one pass that hits the guy IN THE FUCKING HANDS WIDE OPEN on a 3rd down conversion, that game is over. No amount of Brady can overcome being down by 7 with 10s on the clock. Here's the Patriots pass defense ranking by year:

2012 - 31st
2011 - 31st
2010 - 30th
2009 - 12th


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 22, 2012, 11:40:28 AM
Yeah, that guy dropping that particular pass was just insane. Wasn't that their first round pick?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 23, 2012, 10:02:51 AM
Watched the Bears/Lions game last night. Dear God, this Lions team is a trainwreck. They won last year with the pass and no run. They apparently thought LeShoure would give them that running game this year. They were wrong. Both he and Bell seem to have a case of the fumbilitis. Not only that but it seems like it just doesn't matter. The Bears were practically giving them the running lanes and the Lions couldn't capitalize on it - Leshoure gets only 63 yards, but more importantly, the running didn't seem to open up their playaction to the long ball or anything else. The Bears just weren't afraid of it. Megatron gets doubled all night because they have no second threat. Their TE's don't provide any sort of threat down the seam like a Jimmy Graham or Jermichael Finley, and their slot receivers aren't even worth mentioning. And oh yeah, they lost Burelson for the rest of the season with a broken leg. They also can't pass protect Stafford against a good rush.

Their special teams are fucking awful. How do you muff 3 punts in one game and still get put back there? The first drive of the second half, their defense stops the Bears for a 3 and out and they immediately lose the momentum by muffing a punt.

Their defense has such a good pass rush and is so good at stuffing the run, but they cannot fucking cover ANYBODY. I don't see how the issues like no secondary offensive weapons and shitty DB's didn't get addressed in the offseason. Yes, they had cap issues but surely they could have done something.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 23, 2012, 10:20:40 AM
Watching the Lions try to get a third down conversion is like watching the cast of Jersey Shore try to do calculus.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 23, 2012, 10:21:30 AM
Suh did a good job of trying to stick Cutler's head up his ass.  That was worth seeing. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on October 23, 2012, 10:29:13 AM
Watching the Lions try to get a third down conversion is like watching the cast of Jersey Shore try to do calculus.

:awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on October 25, 2012, 10:00:48 AM
 :awesome_for_real:

(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18363rbta7mm8jpg/xlarge.jpg)

Image is from  this Deadspin (http://deadspin.com/5954569/american-hero-poses-with-roger-goodell-while-wearing-free-sean-payton-shirt) item.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 25, 2012, 10:34:30 AM
That has to be seriously pissing the Ginger Hammer off. Good. Fuck him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Surlyboi on October 28, 2012, 10:05:39 AM
They send Bill Belichick all the way to London and he still looks like a homeless masshole.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MuffinMan on October 28, 2012, 02:27:18 PM
Go home, Romo. You're drunk.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 28, 2012, 02:28:52 PM
The fact the press still continues to call Romo great makes me wonder if they are watching the same games I am.

Also, I want Dez Bryant to go away and never come back to the NFL. He's a petulant, braindead child.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on October 28, 2012, 05:00:23 PM
The Giants/Cowboys game was way more interesting then it had any business being. The Giants offense was just snoozing the entire game.





Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on October 28, 2012, 06:02:26 PM
I love Tony Romo.   :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on October 28, 2012, 08:56:23 PM
(http://cdn.ksk.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/romorage.gif)

:awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 29, 2012, 08:44:37 AM
So apparently there are a good things happening in Miami that only have a few possible explanations. Either 1) Joe Philbin is a really good fucking coach or 2) Ryan Tannehill is a better QB than everyone rated him. Granted, Miami's schedule hasn't been grueling, but this is a team that is 2 OT field goals away from a 6-1 record. I'm staring to lean towards #1 because Tannehill got hurt yesterday and Matt Moore did well. Perhaps part of the reason Aaron Rodgers had a tough time early in the year was because Philbin wasn't his QB's coach anymore because Miami has NO ONE to throw to and yet their offense has been pretty decent. As for the Jets, FUCK THEM. I'm so happy to see this team self-destruct. They trade for Tebow then barely use him. They are supposedly a "ground and pound" team  yet Sanchez throws 54 FUCKING TIMES yet can't find the endzone until the game is over. The team is just an absolute disgrace and they are one  OT win away from being 2-6.

I also take much joy from the QQing in Philly. That team got DOMINATED by the Falcons yesterday, to the point I just switched the game off in the 3rd quarter. At least they didn't turn the ball over but their offense was terrible, their defense committed so many penalties to keep the Falcons's drives alive and they didn't ever seem to be in the game at all. This team could easily be winless and probably should be. The Falcons do look like a world beater right now, but I'll reserve judgement until they hit the playoffs. The one troubling thing about them is how anemic their rushing game is. A team with Michael Turner should not be having this much trouble running the ball.

Dallas spent heavy in the offseason on defense, and it's the only thing that kept them in that game yesterday. Romo was fucking wretched the first half, and if that defense wasn't so good, the game would have been a rout. Dez Bryant is also a retard. I have yet to see a level of consistency out of him, which pretty much characterizes the entire Cowboys team. Felix Jones shouldn't be that bad at running the ball. I can't understand why they can't find a 3rd receiver in this offense but really, they have two #2's playing at the WR position (Austin is good but not #1 good), a good TE and nothing else. The losses in that division yesterday basically handed the NFC East to the Giants, except for their 2 losses both being against divisional opponents.

Why does Norv Turner still have a job? You can't even score 10 points AGAINST CLEVELAND even when they only score 7 FUCKING POINTS? There is no way anyone can tell me Philip Rivers is an "elite" QB anymore after throwing for 154 yards AGAINST THE BROWNS. He can't blame the lack of a running game - Matthews had 95 yards. Rivers had 18 completions, and only 2 went to a wide receiver. This team is SO BAD.

And speaking of bad, the New Orleans Saints. Brees has 59.7% completion rate, but is only averaging 7.3 yards per attempt. That puts him behind ALEX SMITH, CAM NEWTON AND JOSH FUCKING FREEMAN. Apparently, Sean Payton really is a motherfucking genius or something. Of course, Brees can't play defense, but that's ok, because neither can anyone else on the Saints.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Slayerik on October 29, 2012, 08:53:05 AM
Don't forget ole Matthew Stafford stepping it up, and the Madden curse living on! Lions still suck, though.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 29, 2012, 09:00:36 AM
Don't forget ole Matthew Stafford stepping it up, and the Madden curse living on! Lions still suck, though.

Thankfully, so do the Seahawks. :rimshot:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 29, 2012, 09:11:14 AM
This sums up everything for me yesterday.

(http://lindyssports.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/PeytonManning2.jpg)

I am over the moon right now with how well the defense is starting to gel. Yes. It was the saints, but they still rank(ed) as the #1 passing offense, and we held them to their lowest of the season. Meanwhile, Manning is back. He doesn't have the same zip, maybe, but he seems more methodical than ever. He's going to destroy a LOT of Broncos records. This probably has to do a lot with an offensive line that is absolutely dominating. I'm now dreading even more not paying Clady LAST off season, because he's going to command a lot this next off season.

Still having a lot of bizarre turnovers, but this team was much more improved from the previous week and is just getting better each week. Thomas and Decker are becoming a lethal 1-2 receiver combination for manning. I admit, I can not at all be objective about this. Just a solid god damn win, and I am excited for the rest of the season. Easiest SoS in the league from here on out and the Chargers have completely fucking melted down. Does Norv Turner survive the season?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 29, 2012, 09:29:20 AM
Does Norv Turner survive the season?

He shouldn't have survived last season, much less this one, so who knows? I see no reason to keep him when their offense lead by an elite QB can't even manage 10 points against one of the worst teams in the league.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 29, 2012, 09:32:09 AM
Does Norv Turner survive the season?

He shouldn't have survived last season, much less this one, so who knows? I see no reason to keep him when their offense lead by an elite QB can't even manage 10 points against one of the worst teams in the league.

The first part of that sentence doesn't match up against the second one. Rivers is done (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=0&season=2012&seasonType=REG&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&conference=null&statisticCategory=PASSING&d-447263-s=PASSING_PASSER_RATING).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 29, 2012, 09:35:42 AM
Oh I know he's done NOW. But all the punditry talks about Philip Rivers as an "elite QB" and he hasn't been that for at least a season. What they forget is he's had fuckall to throw to in that entire team. Vincent Jackson and Gates were his best targets and Gates has declined rapidly with injury while Jackson just didn't want to be in San Diego. He doesn't have a true #1 and I'd argue he doesn't have a #2, so it may not be all his fault. I blame Turner and AJ Smith more than Rivers. But yeah, Rivers isn't elite by any stretch of the imagination anymore.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 29, 2012, 09:38:41 AM
Yeah, his targets suck, but an "elite qb" can find at least a couple #2s. I have a feeling San Diego will shed Turner this year, and possibly go into rebuilding mode. The way they played, they won't even up #2 in the AFC West.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on October 30, 2012, 12:35:29 AM
I think you have good reason to be up on your team, Sick.  Manning's greatest asset by far has always been his brain, so the (exaggerated) decline of his body isn't as huge an issue as the talking heads would have us believe.  With a solid defense and an offense that continues to come together under Peyton?  I wouldn't want to face that team on any given Sunday.  Who in the AFC is clearly better than Denver?  Houston I guess, but not by much.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on October 30, 2012, 07:25:40 AM
I think you have good reason to be up on your team, Sick.  Manning's greatest asset by far has always been his brain, so the (exaggerated) decline of his body isn't as huge an issue as the talking heads would have us believe.  With a solid defense and an offense that continues to come together under Peyton?  I wouldn't want to face that team on any given Sunday.  Who in the AFC is clearly better than Denver?  Houston I guess, but not by much.

Baltimore may be done for the year, but they can still be dangerous, and New England is... well, New England. I have big hopes but I know it's far from over. But, I'm now optimistic about 11-5/12-4.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 30, 2012, 07:43:29 AM
Judging by league, I think the best teams by what I consider to be the most playoff relevant stats are:

GB, Houston, Atlanta, Giants, Denver - in that order as my top 5 super bowl contenders.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on October 30, 2012, 07:44:54 AM
You shouldn't leave out the 49ers, but other than that, I agree with your assessment.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on October 30, 2012, 07:49:11 AM
You shouldn't leave out the 49ers, but other than that, I agree with your assessment.

I leave them out for one reason. I think they are overblown in their defensive set. They have some gaudy numbers in pass defense rating that I believe are very much part of their schedule, and not their skill. Even with that, they haven't produced the sack numbers I want in a super bowl defense. My consistent rating is look at the teams that are top 5 in sacks and/or top 5 in offensive passer rating, and you have a pretty good shot at being great in the playoffs. If you have both, it's VERY good and you're likely a super bowl team.

Right now Green Bay tops the list, if I'm putting money on any team going deep in the NFC, it's them.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on November 04, 2012, 08:20:57 AM
Adam Schefter reported this morning that Sean Payton is a free agent after the season (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8592214/sean-payton-deal-new-orleans-saints-voided-nfl-sources-say=). Goodbye Jason Garrett.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on November 04, 2012, 01:35:49 PM
I doubt it very much.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 04, 2012, 01:41:16 PM
Sean wouldn't take that job. No head coach that's established himself wants to work for Jerry after what happened with Parcells.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 04, 2012, 02:32:16 PM
The NFL has apparently told the refs that the Giants need a misery win due to the storm. Holy shit that's a series of epic bad calls.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on November 04, 2012, 02:38:26 PM
Only bad call was the PF in the endzone against Cruz.  The rest can be called either way.  The PI was tickytacky but technically correct. 

And it was a fumble.  He just punched it forward.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 04, 2012, 02:54:37 PM
They call that "fumble" incomplete and it's incomplete. That's a bad call because they are required to let those plays go now, but always defer to the call on the field. It's a stupid double standard in the replay rules.

The PF call was a joke. That series was dead. Game should be tied.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on November 04, 2012, 03:09:04 PM
The fumble call was the correct call.  The ball was out of his control at that point. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 04, 2012, 03:23:28 PM
Yeah, and blindside blocks are now apparently a personal foul.

I mean FFS.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bungee on November 05, 2012, 02:11:46 AM
The fumble call was the correct call.  The ball was out of his control at that point. 

Mike Pereira doesn't agree with you there:
Phil Simms came back & said that he agreed with the fumble call. As much as I like Phil, I have to disagree. He did not loose control.

Tuck rule says "empty hand moving forward" as the implication that it was a fumble. How often have you seen QBs just kicking the ball forward after their arm was hit? I'm just glad they still got away with the W. But contrary to most "experts" I don't see it as that big a victory- after all I can only speculate as to how much time the Giants actually spent on preparation for this game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on November 05, 2012, 06:56:50 AM
The entire NFC East lost this weekend and Philly plays tonight.  I love the rumblehouse that is the NFC East.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on November 05, 2012, 06:57:44 AM
God the AFC North is unwatchably bad right now.  The entire division went into the shitter this season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 05, 2012, 08:51:40 AM
God the AFC North is unwatchably bad right now.  The entire division went into the shitter this season.

The entire AFC has gone to the shitter. I still think Houston is a good team but it would be good enough for a wildcard in the NFC.

The Packers took care of business before the bye which could not have come at a better time. Jordy Nelson, Bryan Bulaga and Clay Matthews all left the game with injuries (not even sure why Nelson was playing TBH). Their offense didn't look great against the Cardinals at times, but it was good enough to get a big win, especially when their defense just smothered the crappy-ass Cardinals. This is the kind of game Green Bay SHOULD be winning by 2 TD's.

I only watched about a half of the Falcons/Dallas game and it was pretty dreadful. Man, watching the Cowboys is painfully boring. The team just doesn't have an offense, which makes no sense whatsoever.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 05, 2012, 08:59:05 AM
It's the haves and the have nots in the NFL this year (and for the last 2 years tbh). Forget about parity in a lot of divisions, forget about "any given Sunday" if you're playing a division leader, and forget about the AFC for the most part.

10 teams in the AFC has .500 records or worse. 9 teams in the NFC have the same. That means only 13 teams have true winning records. Of those 13, 3 of them are in the NFC North. The AFC East, AFC West, NFC South, and NFC East only have one team with a true winning record.

The bottom 8 teams in the AFC are a combined 19-47. The bottom 8 teams in the NFC are a combined 27-39.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on November 05, 2012, 09:43:20 AM
In other news...

Peyton Manning has thrown for 2404 yards and lead the Broncos to a 5-3 record.
Andrew Luck has thrown for 2404 yards and lead the Colts to a 5-3 record.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on November 05, 2012, 12:38:58 PM
God the AFC North is unwatchably bad right now.  The entire division went into the shitter this season.

The entire AFC has gone to the shitter. I still think Houston is a good team but it would be good enough for a wildcard in the NFC.

HEY, we're not all bad.

But, I think that says more about the strength of the NFC in general this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 05, 2012, 02:20:33 PM
I'm taking the Saints tonight. I don't feel good about it, but I question Philly scoring on the road without tripping over their own dicks.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 05, 2012, 02:34:49 PM
I think it'll be a high scoring game with lots of turnovers and will be fucking awful to watch. So I won't be watching. I'm still hoping someone lets a rabid bulldog out onto the field to end Vick's career but watching him fail so spectacularly is quite fun as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on November 05, 2012, 03:04:09 PM
I think it'll be a high scoring game with lots of turnovers and will be fucking awful awesome to watch.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on November 05, 2012, 03:22:52 PM
Not going to watch it, it'll be like two special needs kids fighting over a beach ball.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 05, 2012, 08:41:19 PM
Saints pick came through. As expected it was all because the Eagles couldn't do anything in the red zone, and they turned it over twice.

If not for a stupid Brees fumble, the game could have been a lot worse.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 05, 2012, 09:42:06 PM
Andy Reid is so getting fired.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on November 06, 2012, 05:30:02 AM
Looking at the Falcons schedule, is there anything realistically standing between this team and a perfect season? Their remaining games are Saints (twice), Bucs (Twice), Panthers, and Cardinals. They only two tough-looking games are Giants in week 15 at home, and the Lions away in week 16.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on November 06, 2012, 05:37:09 AM
Looking at the Falcons schedule, is there anything realistically standing between this team and a perfect season? Their remaining games are Saints (twice), Bucs (Twice), Panthers, and Cardinals. They only two tough-looking games are Giants in week 15 at home, and the Lions away in week 16.

I would say the Saints and Bucs both are unpredictable, thus dangerous games. Should win is not will win.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on November 06, 2012, 05:44:57 AM
Yeah, they could (and possibly should) easily lose three of those games.  5 games against division foes?  I don't think they will make it out of that so cleanly.  Add to that the fact that they will lock up the division very early, and you are probably looking at 14-2 or 13-3.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on November 06, 2012, 06:58:37 AM
Oh god iggles - really?


(http://cdn3.sbnation.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/2741175/20121105215701.0_standard_709.0.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 06, 2012, 07:14:08 AM
The funny part was, it almost worked. If not for a terrible pass, he was gone.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 06, 2012, 08:04:31 AM
Andy Reid is so getting fired.

Yes. Serves him right for hitching his team to the human turnover machine that is Dog Killer. What does $40 million buy you? A fuckton of red zone INT's and a pink slip. It might have bought you an offensive line to block for the retard, but running QB's don't need that!

The Eagles have no excuse. They could run Shady McCoy 35 times a game and do better than they have with Reid's "I'll throw 65% of the time and only run to remind people this isn't the Arena League."


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on November 06, 2012, 08:09:35 AM
The funny part was, it almost worked. If not for a terrible pass, he was gone.

It was actually a damn good pass imo. I think Cooper just left the endzone too early so the pass (which hit him in stride) ended up being a forward pass instead of a lateral. had Cooper started less than half a second later it would have been perfect.

As for Reid, I'm with Haem on this. When you have McCoy there's no reason to not run 30 times per game, especially when he has ~100 yards in the first half.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 06, 2012, 08:45:35 AM
5.5 yards per pass attempt for the Eagles last night, and 7.3 yards per carry discounting Vick's scrambles.

That said, the Eagles called 23 runs and 47 passes. I count the 6 Vick runs as called passes. You can probabaly fudge on 1 or 2 as called QB draws.

You have a wretched offensive line that's getting people murdered. Your QB has been sacked 7 times in a game. And yet you're still calling passes in a game that was honestly within reach in the 3rd quarter. That deserves scorn, and that falls on the Eagles playcaller.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on November 06, 2012, 09:17:28 AM
Yes. Serves him right for hitching his team to the human turnover machine that is Dog Killer. What does $40 million buy you? A fuckton of red zone INT's and a pink slip.

Don't forget the 5 lost fumbles.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on November 06, 2012, 12:18:37 PM
This  (http://espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/story/_/id/8600224/jerry-jones-says-always-dallas-cowboys-gm)should make Cowboys fans happy......  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on November 06, 2012, 12:21:52 PM
Jerry Jones reminds Cowboys fans that, if you have enough money, you are allowed to make an infinite number of stupid decisions.

News at 11.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on November 06, 2012, 12:25:17 PM
Yes, it's not really news.  However, is there anything more delicious than watching Cowboys fans squirm?   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on November 06, 2012, 12:26:54 PM
Yes, it's not really news.  However, is there anything more delicious than watching Cowboys fans squirm?   :awesome_for_real:

Yes... watching Yankees fans squirm.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 06, 2012, 12:37:43 PM
This  (http://espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/story/_/id/8600224/jerry-jones-says-always-dallas-cowboys-gm)should make Cowboys fans happy......  :grin:

Quote
"We've had success doing it this way and we're going to have success in the future doing it this way," Jones said. "It eliminates some very serious issues when you look around the league, as to creating an additional layer that you're continually having decisions, making changes and doing those kinds of things."

Really? We've had success doing it this way? Jerry steals all of Tex Schramm's notes and proceeds to fall ass backwards into the most lopsided trade in the history of the NFL. After that? 20 years of draft failure.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on November 06, 2012, 12:49:41 PM
Yes, it's not really news.  However, is there anything more delicious than watching Cowboys fans squirm?   :awesome_for_real:

Yes... watching Yankees fans squirm.

Really?  I guess I don't know any.  I do live in a sea of Cowboys fans though.  Maybe it's just location. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 07, 2012, 01:31:24 PM
This is too good not to steal share-

(http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2012/1107/grantland_tebowinbox_1152.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 07, 2012, 01:52:16 PM
Total win. "Winter is coming..."


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on November 07, 2012, 02:08:43 PM
The Norv one got me! 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on November 07, 2012, 02:10:29 PM
The Aaron Rogers one is glorious.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on November 07, 2012, 02:15:47 PM
Hilarious.  Love me some Grantland.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on November 07, 2012, 02:45:31 PM
I know a hooker.  Tits like Vince Wilfork.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on November 08, 2012, 09:07:10 AM
That is straight up one of the best image-humor jokes I've seen in awhile.  Right up there with The Onion's Tebow/ground article.

However, homer's gotta home:  Bucs might actually be in line for a playoff bid if the defense can stop getting caught doing drugs.  Josh Freeman is finally showing us what we've always wanted.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on November 08, 2012, 09:17:29 AM
That is straight up one of the best image-humor jokes I've seen in awhile.  Right up there with The Onion's Tebow/ground article.

A similar one, on LeBron's hacked email (http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/32931/fauxlusive-lebrons-email-hacked), posted a few months back, is just as hilarious.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 08, 2012, 09:18:28 AM
Oh cmlancas, you make me chuckle.  :grin: The Bucs have no shot at Wild Card, and there's no way they can catch the Falcons with their terrible schedule.

You still have 3 WC teams ahead of you, and you have to play the Falcons twice. Here's the bigger problem: Your pass defense is a trainwreck. Not only are you dead last in the league in yards given up through the air, you're tied for 5th to last in sacks, and you gamble like crazy in the secondary. It's either going to be a pick or it's going to the house.

The good news is that you've carried a robust turnover margin. The bad news is that it hasn't stopped you from giving up 23 a game on average. The worst news is that you have to still play Atlanta, Denver, and NO on the road. Those teams like to fling it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on November 08, 2012, 09:35:11 AM
I might should've posted in green, but I figure homers gotta home.

I'm just glad we have something to cheer for that isn't "God, please let us score more than 10 points and hold the opposing team under 50."  Fuck you Raheem.  You could've been great if your personnel decisions matched your charisma (Dominik is actually not awful).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on November 08, 2012, 11:16:01 AM
Bucs pass defense might suck but the offense is really humming now.  Now that Freeman has an actual #1 receiver he's playing much, much better and Doug Martin is finally hitting his groove.  Don't forget, Tampa was just one step out of bounds from beating New Orleans once already.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 08, 2012, 11:59:54 AM
New Orleans has the worst defense on both pass and run side of the ball in the NFL  :awesome_for_real:

But yeah I think Tampa has the best room to grow in the NFC South next year. They need a better DE, a better linebacker core, and a better tight end option. I like Dallas Clark, but he's old and slow now.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on November 09, 2012, 09:17:42 AM
However, homer's gotta home:  Bucs might actually be in line for a playoff bid if the defense can stop getting caught doing drugs.  Josh Freeman is finally showing us what we've always wanted.

At the very least they will be in the discussion towards the end of the year and that's much better than what I anticipated.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on November 09, 2012, 10:01:01 AM
I see them going 5-3 or 4-4 the rest of the stretch. They still have to play ATL twice though.

Schedule: SD, @CAR, ATL, @DEN, PHI, @NO, STL, @ATL


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 11, 2012, 04:34:30 PM
Atlanta's defense needs to be ashamed of what they put out on the field.

So should Philly's.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 12, 2012, 09:24:31 AM
Atlanta's defense needs to be ashamed of what they put out on the field.

So should Philly's.  :awesome_for_real:

Philly should just be ashamed, period. Though Vick's concussion might have saved him from the shame of being replaced by a rookie. Has the Nick Foles era begun?

I didn't watch much yesterday, just a little of the Dallas/Philly game and the Houston/Chicago game. Philly is done as a playoff contender and Dallas is hanging on by a thread. Amazing how many teams just shit the bed yesterday. San Diego? Done. Buh-bye Norv Turner. Of course, the fucking Giants just shit the bed period (which fucked both my fantasy teams - fuck you Eli). The Bengals? REALLY? The AFC West just became the Broncos and no one else. Ryan Fitzpatrick ended Buffalo's season with a really bad pick in the endzone. Miami got curbstomped by the Titans, though it seems like most of that was just shooting themselves in the foot while trying to shoot the ball they just dropped. Indy is 6-3 and 2 games ahead of San Diego for a wild card spot? THE FUCK? Detroit is determined not to get back into the playoffs this year, though having AP running up and down the field all day didn't help. Letting Christian Ponder have another good day just shows how badly the Lions really needed to improve their defensive backfield this year - I'd say on balance, their draft this year was terrible.

Chicago loses Cutler to a concussion (on a really shitty, vicious illegal hit). The announcers were bemoaning at the end that Chicago didn't address its backup QB situation as if Campbell had done so much worse than Cutler. Hey, cuntface, Cutler wasn't lighting up that defense either. In fact, 2 INT's and a 16.7 rating in the first half? Campbell actually had better stats partly because the Bears actually tried running the ball. Still didn't matter when your team puts the ball on the ground so much as well. Houston did better offensively though neither lit the world on fire. Chicago has a real problem - their offense doesn't click against good defenses.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on November 12, 2012, 09:29:20 AM
Atlanta's defense needs to be ashamed of what they put out on the field.

So should Philly's.  :awesome_for_real:

Philly should just be ashamed, period. Though Vick's concussion might have saved him from the shame of being replaced by a rookie. Has the Nick Foles era begun?

I didn't watch much yesterday, just a little of the Dallas/Philly game and the Houston/Chicago game. Philly is done as a playoff contender and Dallas is hanging on by a thread. Amazing how many teams just shit the bed yesterday. San Diego? Done. Buh-bye Norv Turner. Of course, the fucking Giants just shit the bed period (which fucked both my fantasy teams - fuck you Eli). The Bengals? REALLY? The AFC West just became the Broncos and no one else. Ryan Fitzpatrick ended Buffalo's season with a really bad pick in the endzone. Miami got curbstomped by the Titans, though it seems like most of that was just shooting themselves in the foot while trying to shoot the ball they just dropped. Indy is 6-3 and 2 games ahead of San Diego for a wild card spot? THE FUCK? Detroit is determined not to get back into the playoffs this year, though having AP running up and down the field all day didn't help. Letting Christian Ponder have another good day just shows how badly the Lions really needed to improve their defensive backfield this year - I'd say on balance, their draft this year was terrible.

Chicago loses Cutler to a concussion (on a really shitty, vicious illegal hit). The announcers were bemoaning at the end that Chicago didn't address its backup QB situation as if Campbell had done so much worse than Cutler. Hey, cuntface, Cutler wasn't lighting up that defense either. In fact, 2 INT's and a 16.7 rating in the first half? Campbell actually had better stats partly because the Bears actually tried running the ball. Still didn't matter when your team puts the ball on the ground so much as well. Houston did better offensively though neither lit the world on fire. Chicago has a real problem - their offense doesn't click against good defenses.

I only watched the first half of Bears/Texans, but the rain made the game a total mess.  Turnover after turnover on both sides.  I mean, you've got to be able to play in whatever conditions, but it looked to me like the first half was a mess on both sides.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 12, 2012, 10:06:49 AM
Chicago relies on turnovers to move the ball. If you can protect your QB and the ball while establishing a variant on the running game, the Bears have no answers. Fling it and hope for the best? Bears will eat you alive.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 15, 2012, 07:13:44 AM
The denial in the Jets franchise over Sanchez is reaching hilarious levels.

Sanchez fails? We'll fire the offensive coordinator. He fails again? We'll shift the story to the backup who isn't playing. He keeps failing? We'll fire the GM for not giving him any weapons.

At what point do you just man up and admit as a franchise that you made a gigantic mistake taking an overrated USC QB. Believe me, you're not the first team to get suckered. He's got the 30th QB rating in the league. The only worse QBs are Skelton, Weedon, and Cassell. Oh shit, look another USC guy in the bottom of the league.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on November 15, 2012, 07:35:01 AM
Who's fault was it for going 11-5 two seasons ago?

Sanchez isn't great, but they have a... lot more issues than just him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bungee on November 15, 2012, 07:39:51 AM
The denial in the Jets franchise over Sanchez is reaching hilarious levels.

Sanchez fails? We'll fire the offensive coordinator. He fails again? We'll shift the story to the backup who isn't playing. He keeps failing? We'll fire the GM for not giving him any weapons.

At what point do you just man up and admit as a franchise that you made a gigantic mistake taking an overrated USC QB. Believe me, you're not the first team to get suckered. He's got the 30th QB rating in the league. The only worse QBs are Skelton, Weedon, and Cassell. Oh shit, look another USC guy in the bottom of the league.  :awesome_for_real:

Where's Romo ranked?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 15, 2012, 08:07:51 AM
Where's Romo ranked?

21st. A notch higher than Eli.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on November 15, 2012, 08:08:31 AM
21st. A notch higher than Eli.

I'd like to know where he ranks in terms of salary.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 15, 2012, 09:12:57 AM
At what point do you just man up and admit as a franchise that you made a gigantic mistake taking an overrated USC QB. Believe me, you're not the first team to get suckered. He's got the 30th QB rating in the league. The only worse QBs are Skelton, Weedon, and Cassell. Oh shit, look another USC guy in the bottom of the league.  :awesome_for_real:

Thing is, it really isn't JUST Sanchez. Oh yes, he's terrible (mostly just terribly inconsistent - when he's good, he can win big, but when he fails, he fails even harder). But even after last year, anyone with eyes could see this team had issues they didn't address at all. They had no running game and Tomlinson was a better back at his advanced age than Greene was ever going to be (Greene also inconsistent). So they let LT go and didn't draft a RB high or sign a decent one or trade for one. Their WR corps was suspect - both Holmes and Burress are at best #2 guys but at least together they gave some threat. So instead of resigning Burress and drafting a WR, they just let Burress go and drafted a WR who has only been on the field 4 or 5 games. Then they pissed away a draft pick on TEBOW and I still can't understand why. They don't use him. They sure don't use him enough for what they gave up for him. Has he even had 100 snaps this season? And he brought with him the added bonus of pressure on Sanchez that the guy clearly cannot handle. I mean, this team isn't just failing on the field, they have failed at almost every stage leading up to the games. That 11-5 season they had 2 seasons ago? They had LT who at the time was running out of his mind for his age, to the point where he masked the serious inadequacies of Greene.

Now they have no wideouts of note, their running game can't run most games and their QB is throwing INT's left and right and can barely complete more than 50% of their passes. At this point, why NOT try Tebow at QB? At least he can run and he's not going to throw many more incompletions than Sanchez.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 15, 2012, 09:27:22 AM
The Jets offense has below average options at every skill position. Their fucking CENTER is easily the best player. Sanchez isn't the only problem, but he certainly is the most visible. His receivers are garbage.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 15, 2012, 12:14:07 PM
Drew Magary from Deadspin gives the funniest angle on the Jets:

What the fuck does Mark Sanchez have to do to lose his job? Does he have to start tackling his own running back after handing the ball off? It's getting out of hand. He should send Tebow a gift certificate for not posing any real threat as a backup. I know we all like to make fun of Tebow for being a terrible quarterback, but at this point I'd happily replace Mark Sanchez with a life-sized Jell-O replica of Joe Namath. They may as well put Tebow out there full time so that I can experience the joy of bitching about Tebow being overcovered by ESPN and hearing anonymous Jets teammates make fun of him publicly for being awful.

By the way, I rooted my ass off for the Rams and Niners to tie last week. The NFL is the last place in major American sports when a game can end in a tie. It can't happen in college ball, or basketball, or baseball except when it's an All-Star game. They're a rare find if you don't happen to care about soccer. And the best part about a tie is that it's a damning indictment of both teams. A tie signals to the world that you had many chances to win the game and still found a way to not do it. It's almost more humiliating than a loss. There's nothing inspiring about a team that goes 8-7-1.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on November 18, 2012, 01:58:02 PM
Randall Cobb is a complete badass.

(http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1759539/cobbmvp.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on November 18, 2012, 03:00:40 PM
It was almost a joy to watch Pat Shurmur's career in Cleveland end today... almost.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on November 18, 2012, 04:55:07 PM
Not a particularly great day of games, but perhaps it was just that I happened to get a crap selection. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on November 19, 2012, 08:51:48 AM
I think it was crap viewing selection, and I suffered it too. Though, I think it was more just a week of bad matchups (who gives a shit about Mia vs Buf), oddities (Jags vs Hou in OT with both teams in the 30's for points....wtf?), and injuries (Pit vs Bal, though the only difference was which major players were playing while the score was about the same as always).



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on November 19, 2012, 09:08:55 AM
Wasn't a great day to be sick and watching games all day.  The Cardinals game was one of the worst I've ever seen.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 19, 2012, 09:50:56 AM
Yeah, I almost watched no games because the matchups were just fuckawful.

I watched Dallas v. Cleveland because I wanted to see if Weedon is a good player on a bad team or what. What I discovered is that Cleveland is NOT a bad team... but it IS a badly coached team. Their offensive line is decent. Trent Richardson is a beast. Their defensive line is pretty fucking tough. But their secondary is trash (their best corner was injured) and their wideouts wouldn't scare anyone. But the coaching? Holy shit, the coaching is goddamn criminal. They spent the first half DOMINATING Dallas, just absolutely shutting down everything the Cowboys tried on offense. Romo ran for his life most of the game. However, second half rolls around and the Dallas offensive scheme changed. For the ENTIRE REST OF THE GAME, Dallas used the same goddamn pass routes over and over. 7 yard curl out, completion. 7 yard curl out, completion. Instead of the defensive coordinator adjusting his coverage to be more press coverage or telling his corners to jump the VERY jumpable routes, he continually had his corners back and play pillow soft coverage. And Romo just DESTROYED them. Anytime it wasn't one of those routes, the Cleveland corners committed some of the dumbest, most idiotic pass interference fouls ever. One guy got flagged like 4 times for the same kind of shit. Hey dumbass, they are calling it tight. STOP RUNNING THROUGH YOUR WR'S BACK, FUCKFACE. And in the end, Cleveland still almost won it. One or two less penalties, and a little more adventurous playcalling in the 3rd quarter (or you know, a wideout that can get open), and it wouldn't even have been close. Or just, you know, ADJUSTING YOUR COVERAGE. It pissed me off because Dallas was dogshit most of the game. I actually think Dallas is a WORSE team - their offensive line is a fucking travesty.

Then I watched most of the San Diego/Denver game. Speaking of shittastic coaching, Norv Turner. HOW DOES HE STILL HAVE A JOB? For that matter, how does the Chargers GM? This team is so bereft of talent in the passing game and on the offensive line it's no wonder Rivers is throwing 18 INT's a game. The Broncos destroyed him. Their line can't block or just aren't trained on how to pick up blitzes or regular pass rush. They can't run for shit. If it weren't for a pick 6, the game wouldn't have been close. Meanwhile, Manning has shown that the Denver receivers are a decent set of pass catchers when they have someone who can complete more than 50% of their passes. Denver is going to be a tough out in the playoffs, especially if they get a home game.

Yes, Randall Cobb is a superstar in the making. That's why I won't really be sad to see Greg Jennings go after this year. Between him and James Jones learning how NOT to drop the ball, their wideout corp is 3 deep with guys who could easily be #1 or #2 on other teams.

Damn you Jets. Now we have another week of Sanchez being the starter. And holy shit, how does Sam Bradford AVERAGE 3.9 yards a pass play? That's terribad. Oh right, have a 51% completion rate.

I didn't watch the Pittsburgh/Ravens game because it's normally a defensive slog fest WITH the Rapist at QB. Without him? I didn't expect the Steelers to do much more than they did. How is Flacco so bad on the road? At least he didn't throw up a bunch of picks.

And speaking of picks, MATT RYAN? 3 INT's in the FIRST QUARTER? You better tighten that up because the playoffs are coming up soon.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on November 19, 2012, 09:55:42 AM
49ers quarterback Alex Smith ruled out for Monday night (http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/49ers-quarterback-alex-smith-ruled-monday-night-145622701--nfl.html)

Let the Colin Kaepernick era begin! :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 19, 2012, 09:58:24 AM
The Cowboys only managed to put 9 men on the field for defense that led to the Browns taking the late lead in the 4th.

Speaking of WTF Coaching moves, that one wins.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 19, 2012, 09:58:34 AM
49ers quarterback Alex Smith ruled out for Monday night (http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/49ers-quarterback-alex-smith-ruled-monday-night-145622701--nfl.html)

Let the Colin Kaepernick era begin! :why_so_serious:


Even though he only got me 6 points, I'm so glad I picked up Ryan Fitzpatrick for Eli's bye week instead of relying on Alex Smith against the Bears.

But holy shit, that's going to make watching tonight's game SUCK.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on November 19, 2012, 10:32:00 AM
I don't get how the Browns could be that god damn awful in the coaching dept with those three heading up the OC, DC, and HC. Sadly, they are just that awful. Hope to start hearing the chants for 'the Chin' or Chucky grumbling from the North shore very soon. No way Jimmy keeps that coaching staff after that game in particular. Just please no Chip Kelly..


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 19, 2012, 11:19:37 AM
Chip Kelly needs to go to Philly. Their offensive stars are perfect for his system.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on November 19, 2012, 11:25:41 AM
Chip Kelly needs to go to Philly. Their offensive stars are perfect for his system.

I think he has NFL aspirations but doesn't want to jump ship for a rebuilder.  I could see him in PHI or DAL (if he could put up with Jerry Jones's shit).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 19, 2012, 12:09:00 PM
If I were Kelly I'd go to New Orleans.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on November 19, 2012, 02:42:45 PM
Huh.  The Browns aren't too bad of a team.  They definitely have a nucleus of players to build on.  Get a new coach next year and I could see them as a .500 team.  Maybe even better. 

Atlanta, man I just don't know.  Ryan is really struggling right now.  They better fix their shit or they'll be 1 and out in the playoffs.

Detroit still finds a way to lose.  It's suddenly a tough as nails division, but to blow a lead at home is ungood.  They need a good secondary and a coach that doesn't make decisions via his Quija board.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 19, 2012, 02:54:58 PM
Huh.  The Browns aren't too bad of a team.  They definitely have a nucleus of players to build on.  Get a new coach next year and I could see them as a .500 team.  Maybe even better. 

They could also use some wideouts.

Quote
Detroit still finds a way to lose.  It's suddenly a tough as nails division, but to blow a lead at home is ungood.  They need a good secondary and a coach that doesn't make decisions via his Quija board.

That's why I say it's criminal what the Lions did in the offseason. They made no moves to IMPROVE the squad in the areas where they were deficient - the defensive secondary and running back. It looks like Bell and LeShoure may work out but it's taken them 10 games to figure that out? And their secondary is just laughable. Green Bay had some of the same issues and though their running game hasn't much improved (though it was when Benson wasn't hurt), their defensive secondary and pass rush is light years ahead of where it was last year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on November 19, 2012, 04:17:13 PM
But holy shit, that's going to make watching tonight's game SUCK.

Seems about the same is it would otherwise. It's still going to be a tough defensive game when both teams had their QBs who don't generally do well vs good defenses, putting in back ups probably won't change that. On the other hand, as a Bears fan with the Bears as their fantasy football defense in multiple leagues....I can't fucking wait for tonight :grin:

Detroit still finds a way to lose.  It's suddenly a tough as nails division

This is not a sudden development by any means. It was a tough division last year even with Minn's crappy record (and it was even tougher before Cutler and Forte got injured to make it a two-team division), but this year Minn has started winning games making it even better.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 19, 2012, 04:45:10 PM
Atlanta, man I just don't know.  Ryan is really struggling right now.  They better fix their shit or they'll be 1 and out in the playoffs.

I'm in the city, and even though I hate the Falcons, I can pinpoint that the problem has nothing to do with Ryan. The interior of their offensive line is complete and utter shit. Ryan's constantly having to hurry throws, and Atlanta has no run game because of it. They struggle so mightily on 3rd and short, or goal line offense, that it's become a running joke in broadcasts that when the Falcons have you at 3rd and 8, they are converting at a higher percentage.

The have probably the most complete wide receiver core in football, so that keeps the offense in gear when they play teams that lack secondaries. As an example, they would destroy a team like New England, but they would get their asses handed to them by a team like Chicago.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on November 19, 2012, 08:13:02 PM
Jay Cutler MVP? :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on November 19, 2012, 10:51:31 PM
The Cowboys only managed to put 9 men on the field for defense that led to the Browns taking the late lead in the 4th.

Speaking of WTF Coaching moves, that one wins.


Is that just a jab at how bad the players were, or did they literally only have 9 players on the field?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on November 19, 2012, 10:57:44 PM
They literally had 9 men on the field when the teams went to line up for the play but managed to get the missing two onto the field before the snap. There seemed to be confusion, though, about coverages/roles.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on November 20, 2012, 12:28:34 AM
That's spectacular.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 20, 2012, 09:01:14 AM
But holy shit, that's going to make watching tonight's game SUCK.

Seems about the same is it would otherwise. It's still going to be a tough defensive game when both teams had their QBs who don't generally do well vs good defenses, putting in back ups probably won't change that. On the other hand, as a Bears fan with the Bears as their fantasy football defense in multiple leagues....I can't fucking wait for tonight :grin:

Heh... BWWWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!

Holy shit, where was the vaunted Bears defense? I mean, I expected the offense would sputter but Jesus Wept. Their defense couldn't stop ANYTHING for most of the first half. The goddamn ROOKIE QB sliced them apart like they were standing still. It was fucking brutal and glorious to watch. Fuck the Bears.

But I really feel bad for Jason Campbell. He's not a BAD QB, but he sure as fuck made Jay Cutler look like an "elite" one. It wasn't his fault, of course. That goddamn Bears O line is a fucking crime. It has not improved ONE FUCKING IOTA since last year, and frankly, Cutler, Forte, Bush and Marshall are the ONLY things making that offense work. Yes, the 49ers may have one of the best pass rushes in the game, but there is no excuse for being an 8 win team and being that goddamn bad at pass blocking. This has been a problem since Mike Martz was the OC and it really hasn't improved much at fucking all. Both Green Bay and San Fran have absolutely destroyed the Bears offensive lines and if they think it's going to get any easier in the playoffs, they are delusional. He may be a douchebag, but Cutler has every reason to be pissed as hell at his O line. They may be the worst in football.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on November 20, 2012, 09:39:37 AM
Yeah, the offense was actually worse than expected and made a very good defense look like gods of the field. It definitely didn't help the defense when it seemed/felt like Chi D was on the field the entire half because the offense couldn't get crap going when playing with an offensive line that just lets guys run in untouched.

The defense was shit and just not characteristic to a point that the game was baffling to watch. Definitely doesn't bode well for the playoffs though, if they can hang on if they don't rebound well from this loss. Though, credit where credit is due - Kaepernick was a lot better than expected. He makes me hope he gets more playtime because SF is a different team with him behind the wheel. Even when playing bad I'd say the Bear's D is above average, and he was solid all night

From here (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/jim_trotter/11/20/49ers-colin-kaepernick-bears/index.html#ixzz2CmivdV3k).
Quote
Six minutes into the fourth quarter, Pro Bowl tight end Vernon Davis approached him on the sideline and bowed before Kaepernick.
"I respect him, I love him, I'm so proud of him at that moment," Davis would say. "The ball that he threw me (his last reception, when he didn't get first down), it was one of those balls that you see Tom Brady throw. Second window, right on the money. I was surprised. I didn't expect the ball to come. We've run that play quite a few times, and the tight end usually doesn't get the ball on that play. But he saw it and he just put it there."




Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 20, 2012, 09:44:11 AM
Yeah, Kaepernick was fucking incredible. The touch on his passes was fantastic, he didn't get rattled when he felt pressure, he didn't get the happy feet I expected a "scrambling QB" to get. If Alex Smith is out for more than a week, that means Kaepernick gets to start against NEW ORLEANS. As bad as that Saints defense is, I smell a coming QB controversy in San Fran because he's probably going to light it the fuck up. After that it's St. Louis and then Miami, so they don't play a good defense again for another 2 games.

It's early days but if last night was any indication, Alex Smith will not be starting in San Fran next year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on November 20, 2012, 09:50:56 AM
I've known Kaep was going to be good since I watched him pick apart Cal a few years ago. Going into that game all we heard was they had this kind of Tebow-y guy who ran a lot, and then watching the game it was like laser guided 30 yard passes all over the place, his accuracy was insane and I couldn't believe he was so far under the radar.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2012, 10:07:19 AM
I remember being really impressed with Colin during his steak-breaker against Boise State back in 2010. I never though he was an NFL guy, but give the 49ers some credit, they traded up to get him in the 2nd round (although I have a feeling they were also eyeing Dalton).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on November 22, 2012, 06:51:07 PM
Glad to see RG III blow the Cow People out of the water.  And happy Thanksgiving!   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on November 22, 2012, 06:52:04 PM
Jets :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 22, 2012, 06:53:32 PM
Detroit got absolutely robbed by a ridiculous rule that will be changed because of it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on November 22, 2012, 06:56:52 PM
Fuck Detroit and the Jets.   :oh_i_see:

And yeah, that issue with Schwartz was fucking stupid.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on November 22, 2012, 07:28:01 PM
I literally laughed out loud during the first half of the New England game.  The Jets were playing like Tampa Bay during the year they came into the league.  All that was missing was the Benny Hill music.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on November 22, 2012, 07:54:38 PM
(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/1865f6xuc7wtugif/original.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on November 22, 2012, 07:56:40 PM
That was TD number two of three in what, 52 seconds?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on November 22, 2012, 07:58:06 PM
That was fucking amazing.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on November 22, 2012, 10:21:15 PM
Detroit got screwed.  That rule is beyond stupid.

Also got screwed on the punt that was reviewed.  If the ball appears to touch a dude, and then the same dude immediately reacts with an "oh god, the ball just hit me I must find it!", then overturn the fucking play.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on November 22, 2012, 11:05:34 PM
Foot meet balls.  (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qubKqevkytc)  I want to say it's an accident, but it's Suh. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on November 22, 2012, 11:06:56 PM
Man, that doesn't even really look like an accident. That guy.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on November 23, 2012, 12:48:33 AM
When I originally saw it yesterday, I chalked it up as an accident....but looking at the slo-mo replay, he appears to deliberately extend his leg at the last instant for not good reason.  Does not seem like a normal reflexive action.

Dude has serious issues.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on November 23, 2012, 03:39:14 AM
(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/1865f6xuc7wtugif/original.gif)


How does that even happen?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bungee on November 23, 2012, 04:10:10 AM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000099258/article/how-the-new-york-jets-lost-in-60-seconds-vs-patriots


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: murdoc on November 23, 2012, 08:11:02 AM
I'm having a miserable morning, but that .gif makes me laugh every single time.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on November 23, 2012, 01:52:51 PM
He seriously just plows right into that dudes ass. Full bore.


It's not like the dude fell on him, or suddenly backed into the lane or something. Just BAM!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 23, 2012, 02:06:50 PM
What a Turkey Day slate of games.

Congratulations, Jim Schwartz. Not only can you not control your players, you can't control your own fucking reflexive roid rage. Why throw the flag? It's game 11 of the season in which EVERY FUCKING SCORING PLAY GETS REVIEWED. If this was game 1 or game 2, I could understand thinking you have to hissy fit and throw your challenge flag, but it isn't. You have had 10 previous games of every single score taking 30 seconds to 10 minutes to be confirmed. EVERY SINGLE SCORE. Put your dick back in your pocket and calm the fuck down and let the officials sort it out instead of knee jerk shit flinging like the monkey you appear to be. It's no wonder Suh think that a ball kick is a suitable end to every play or that your team can't stop getting penalties.

Is it stupid as fucking stupid can get to say that a play can't be reviewed because some twat tossed a hanky on the field at the wrong time? Why yes it is, and if the NFL doesn't change it, they might as well bring back the replacement refs because this shit is getting real. But there is no good reason to throw that flag at that point and no excuse. Show some fucking restraint or your players aren't ever going to learn to either. Welcome to not making the playoffs, jagoff.

Dallas. LOL. If only they could find that team which manages to make games competitive long after they've removed any chance of winning and play THAT team on every down. Doesn't help when their offensive line can't block a pack of cripples. Also, RGIII. I hate Dan Synder, but RGIII makes me root for the Skins.

The Jets. Jesus wept. Is there any team more committed to dropping the ugliest, stinking-est turds in the punch bowl week after week? They can't even claim it was against a great team, because the fuckups they made to lose the game to New England all happened against New England's defense, and that defense shouldn't scare anyone. No pass rush to speak of. Their best corner is one bender away from another suspension. Yet, somehow, the Jets find a way to give up 21 points to that defense in less than 60 seconds. It's just pure ineptitude. It's time to blow this whole thing up and start again - technically it was time last season with 2 minutes left to go in their season and their 'star' wideout pouting on the sidelines, but the owner is apparently a stubborn rich twat.

Fuck Mark Sanchez, fuck Rex Ryan and fuck their shitty GM. Chants of TEBOW ringing through the stadium the entire game should have told everyone involved what a bunch of clueless, classless fuckups they were but I'm sure we'll get five more weeks of Sanchez overpriced slow bus.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on November 23, 2012, 04:34:08 PM
Seriously, fuck those refs for letting that guy get up and run for a TD.  Lions can't beat both the Texans and the refs.  I'm getting sick of this league and their goober rules.  Sure, Swartz was a dillweed for throwing the flag, but that's still a stupid crazy rule. So we've had the Calvin Johnson rule and now we HAD BETTER get a Swartz rule.

Fuck the Lions over?  Sure why not, we'll change the rule in the offseason.  I know the Lions had a 1% change of making the playoffs, but that put the fatal bullet in their head.

Shitty shit season. 



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on November 23, 2012, 04:43:46 PM
What can the Jets do at this point? Trade him to Arizona? He's broken and not going to get better unless they are going to clean out the entire coaching staff AND get rid of Tebow, Sanchez has completely cracked at this point and while he has always seemed a bit too much of a delicate flower I can't blame him this year, what a dumpster fire.

If it wouldn't make the Jets so much better I'd almost wish for San Diego to trade Sanchez for Rivers and the Jets 2014 first rounder or something. Both of those guys need a change of scenery so bad.

***

The Lions rule made perfectly good sense, it wasn't what they intended to happen but it was the rules and Schwartz is a fucking toolbox. The you can't get a review after a penalty was designed to prevent delay of games while coaches decided if they wanted to challenge and the throwing a challenge flag on a play you can't challenge was meant as a prevent coaches from acting like Jim Schwartz rule on things like pass interference I'm pretty sure they made that rule BEFORE they made the quite new you can't win a challenge if you commit a penalty after the play.

As for letting him run, that is good officiating and what they tell the refs to do. Early whistles are much worse on balance than late whistles.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on November 23, 2012, 04:52:22 PM
But he was so clearly down by contact.  Everyone stopped playing.  It was just so obvious.  If it had been unclear I could have shrugged my shoulders.

And the Jets are 10 pounds of crazy in a 5 pound wet paper bag.  How they win any games is as big a mystery to me as the Kennedy assassination.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on November 23, 2012, 07:27:52 PM
If you stop playing before you hear a whistle, it's your own fault.


It's happened so many times before, and I'm sure it will happen again.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on November 25, 2012, 08:44:04 PM
Fucking terrible game today with Bad Road Flacco determined to overthrow people in the next timezone.

Then this happened.   :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill:

(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-5tvldE0jTHY/ULK01lhYwLI/AAAAAAAAAac/NGpwWVHcQPc/w497-h373/ray%2Brice%2Bdetermination.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MediumHigh on November 26, 2012, 01:35:53 AM
Fucking terrible game today with Bad Road Flacco determined to overthrow people in the next timezone.

Then this happened.   :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill:

(https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-5tvldE0jTHY/ULK01lhYwLI/AAAAAAAAAac/NGpwWVHcQPc/w497-h373/ray%2Brice%2Bdetermination.gif)

Was that the camera or did he just magically speed up...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on November 26, 2012, 02:26:08 AM
I think it is just the effect of the terrible framerate of the clip combined with the fact that the camera suddenly pans quickly to the left.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on November 26, 2012, 05:14:37 AM
I think it is just the effect of the terrible framerate of the clip combined with the fact that the camera suddenly pans quickly to the left.

He does get some acceleration as he cuts upfield, but not quite to that extent.   Video is here

http://www.businessinsider.com/video-ray-rice-converting-a-4th-and-29-might-be-the-play-of-the-year-2012-11#ooid=E5c2k4Nzr79hcHF6pOQtZnca5AcV82eF


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on November 26, 2012, 05:49:37 AM
I was trying to find a .gif of the Boldin block because he killed a guy but I can't find it anywhere.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on November 26, 2012, 05:53:03 AM
I was trying to find a .gif of the Boldin block because he killed a guy but I can't find it anywhere.

That always makes me laugh when it happens.

(http://www-thescore.s3.amazonaws.com/images/61762/original.gif?1353901326)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on November 26, 2012, 06:51:07 AM
You know as much as I enjoyed the Pats destroying the Jets on Thursday, the DET-HOU game and that 4 and 29 make me want to poke my eyes out. Rich people problems I know but when you need the Texans and Ravens to lose some games to hopefully get a first round bye and the fucking missed field goals, stupid flag throws, and that FUCKING KEYSTONE COPS DEFENSE ON 4 and FUCKING  :uhrr: :uhrr: :uhrr: :uhrr: :uhrr: :uhrr: :uhrr: 29 ...thats just rubbing it in.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on November 26, 2012, 07:35:41 AM
I was trying to find a .gif of the Boldin block because he killed a guy but I can't find it anywhere.

That always makes me laugh when it happens.

(http://www-thescore.s3.amazonaws.com/images/61762/original.gif?1353901326)

I miss the days when tackling was taught, not banging into people with your upper body/helmet. Someone give Ronnie Lott a call and have him coach your DBs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on November 26, 2012, 07:39:11 AM
I miss the day when it was considered a great hit when you planted our helmet under someone's chin.  Now it's a 4 figure fine. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on November 26, 2012, 08:25:34 AM
In that day linebackers weren't 280lbs of pure muscle and ran 4.4 40s.  

If we allowed that type of hit now, you'd lose 30 players a week to concussions.  The nostalgia and "be a man" bullshit is grand and all, but it's fucking stupid. I'd rather these guys at least make to 30 before a light tap on their head knocks them flat.

edit: and yah, that was just a dumb tackle attempt. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on November 26, 2012, 08:34:14 AM
If we allowed that type of hit now, you'd lose 30 players a week to concussions.

If they would have known how to accurately assess for concussions and kept people out if it appeared dangerous they'd probably have lost close to that back in the good old days of football.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 26, 2012, 08:40:18 AM
A ton of NFL players are on HGH right now. The NFL wanted the testing in the bargaining agreement for blood testing, and not shockingly the players blocked it. Now they have to run some stupid study that will take another couple of years, and then the players can move on to some other untested regimen.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on November 26, 2012, 09:00:16 AM
how about lead with your shoulders and wrap up with your arms? Why the fuck people decided it would be a good idea to tackle with your head just because you are wearing a helmet is beyond me. Kids need to play rugby in the spring.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 26, 2012, 09:26:21 AM
It's not often that I turn a Packers game off in frustration, but I just had to last night. It was FUCKING PAINFUL to watch Aaron Rodgers try to play football while running for his fucking life like he was Jay Cutler. He can't blame the lack of a running game, because they really tried to build a running game. But holy shit, that fucking offensive line went to absolute fucking tissue paper when Bulaga went out. There is no excuse for your backups to be THIS BAD. Yes, the Giants know how to rush the passer but fuck me, how is a guy supposed to pass the ball with no time to set his feet? Their O line play has been somewhat suspect all year but this game was just a fucking meltdown. They will not beat anyone in the playoffs with this. And their defense? Just as bad. They couldn't stop the run at all, and their pass rush was mostly nonexistent again AND they can't cover anyone going over the middle. They are decimated with injuries but backups aren't supposed to mean this much of a drop off in quality. Just a fucking shameful game from start to finish. And fuck you Eli for catching fire right after I bench your ass in fantasy. I should have known to start the little punk to give the Packers a chance.

Kaepernick didn't do quite as well this game against a shitty Saints defense but he did well enough, especially with that incredible defense. Aldon Smith is a beast. He's every bit as good (or better) than Clay Matthews AND he has guys almost as good as him around him. I just imagine how good the Packers could be with that much defensive talent.

Fuck you, Chargers. At home, against the terrible Joe Flacco and you can't stop a FOURTH AND FUCKING 29??? Why does Norv Turner still have a job?

EIGHT TURNOVERS. STEELERS LOSE TO THE BROWNS. LOLOCOPTER.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on November 26, 2012, 09:55:09 AM
Agree with the above mention of the red flag rule needing to go. That is some dumb shit. I'm fine with giving a penalty, but a review should never be skipped on plays which should be reviewed. Such bullshit.

Kaepernick didn't do quite as well this game against a shitty Saints defense but he did well enough, especially with that incredible defense. Aldon Smith is a beast. He's every bit as good (or better) than Clay Matthews AND he has guys almost as good as him around him. I just imagine how good the Packers could be with that much defensive talent.

Fun reading this line when I normally have to say "imagine how good the Bears would be with GB's offensive talent." :why_so_serious:

Quote
Fuck you, Chargers. At home, against the terrible Joe Flacco and you can't stop a FOURTH AND FUCKING 29??? Why does Norv Turner still have a job?
While I think Norv should have been let go before this year, that 4th and 29 should not be against him. He can't run onto the field and make the tackle. He did his part in coaching his team well enough to be in the lead and all but had the game wrapped up. Sadly, all Rice had to do was to cut across the field because 3 or 4 defenders took horrible fucking angles. It wasn't even some hard cut or some major juke, he just turned a little. That is not Norv's fault.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on November 26, 2012, 10:03:38 AM
In that day linebackers weren't 280lbs of pure muscle and ran 4.4 40s.  

I see that we both enjoy a good exaggeration.  My comment was mostly made in jest.

NFL LB's run a 4.5 to 4.7 40yd (measured much more accurately than when I ran my 4.5) and go about 240-260lbs.  (Patrick Willis = 240lbs, Ray Lewis = 240, DeMarcus Ware = 254).  

The hardest hitting DB I can think of was Steve Atwater who weighed about 220 and ran a 4.44 40 yd.  He and I played in the same era (and he was barely a step faster than I was).   :-P



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 26, 2012, 10:19:20 AM
Kaepernick didn't do quite as well this game against a shitty Saints defense but he did well enough, especially with that incredible defense. Aldon Smith is a beast. He's every bit as good (or better) than Clay Matthews AND he has guys almost as good as him around him. I just imagine how good the Packers could be with that much defensive talent.

Fun reading this line when I normally have to say "imagine how good the Bears would be with GB's offensive talent." :why_so_serious:

No, they'd still have that atrocious offensive line. See last night's game to see how offensive talent doesn't matter when your QB is running for his life all game.

Quote
Quote
Fuck you, Chargers. At home, against the terrible Joe Flacco and you can't stop a FOURTH AND FUCKING 29??? Why does Norv Turner still have a job?
While I think Norv should have been let go before this year, that 4th and 29 should not be against him. He can't run onto the field and make the tackle. He did his part in coaching his team well enough to be in the lead and all but had the game wrapped up. Sadly, all Rice had to do was to cut across the field because 3 or 4 defenders took horrible fucking angles. It wasn't even some hard cut or some major juke, he just turned a little. That is not Norv's fault.

Horrible angles are a direct result of bad coaching. Tackling angles are some of the most basic coachable football skills. Yes, some guys will never get it right and sometimes guys just execute poorly. I'd say it ain't just the players, it's the coaching too.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on November 26, 2012, 10:25:34 AM
The bottom line with coaches at any level is just win.  That doesn't necessarily mean a championship every season, but you must perform in line with your organization's expectations for the season.

For my home team, that's why Raheem Morris was out on his ass a season after his surprise 10-6 run. Also, why Jon Gruden came in and won Tony Dungy's TB championship.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on November 26, 2012, 10:29:40 AM
The hardest hitting DB I can think of was Steve Atwater who weighed about 220 and ran a 4.44 40 yd.  He and I played in the same era (and he was barely a step faster than I was).   :-P

What about Chuck Cecil?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on November 26, 2012, 10:32:48 AM
He's solid, but I like this hit better. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvPxzQBIafo)  

For reference: Okoye was 6'1" and 260.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on November 26, 2012, 10:36:28 AM

No, they'd still have that atrocious offensive line. See last night's game to see how offensive talent doesn't matter when your QB is running for his life all game.


Which is why Dante Scarnecchia is the real reason the Pats are good each year. Thursday game was another example, two starting O-line out, and another almost flawless performance from the o-line.

Oh and Norv Turner is horrible, so horrible that blaming him for that 4 and 29 maybe just piling on at this point...:D


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on November 26, 2012, 10:57:59 AM
No, they'd still have that atrocious offensive line. See last night's game to see how offensive talent doesn't matter when your QB is running for his life all game.

Quote
I do count the o-line as part of the talen, and GB's offensive line is normally passable at least....unlike Chi's. Reason why I used the word normally.

Quote
Horrible angles are a direct result of bad coaching. Tackling angles are some of the most basic coachable football skills. Yes, some guys will never get it right and sometimes guys just execute poorly. I'd say it ain't just the players, it's the coaching too.

To some extent yes, most of it comes down to players remembering what they're taught and not getting greedy/cocky and maintaining their role/angle/position/containment/etc. This didn't happen yesterday and as a result Rice made a 4th and 29 almost seem easy. If it was a result of bad coaching, there would have been plenty more plays of that sort yesterday and SD would not have been leading 13-10 at that point.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 26, 2012, 10:58:59 AM
San Diego was likely leading because Flacco is FUCKTASTICALLY BAD on the road. They were only leading by 3 at the time.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on November 26, 2012, 01:41:35 PM
So if SD was only winning because Flacco is fucktastically bad on the road, why wasn't SD also losing when Rivers is worse than Flacco (regardless of home/away) this year with 2x more INTs, 4:1 lost fumbles, and less yards? Regardless of the amount, a lead is a lead and Turner can't go on the field and tackle to fix an issue which wasn't an issue before hand (proving it's almost not the coaching problem for this issue)

I still agree overall - fire his ass. My only issue is that it should be done based on holding him accountable for what is within his control, and there was more than enough to do so 2 years ago.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 26, 2012, 01:53:22 PM
If your defense can't tackle, you start firing defensive coaches until they can teach proper tackling or you can replace the shitty players that you have. So at the very least, their DC is probably culpable for it. Ultimately, though, the head coach has got to see that tackling is a problem (and I think it is for them) and fire someone or light someone up until it gets fixed and if it doesn't, BUH-BYE. For an similar situation, I think the Packers OC ought to be having his ass chewed regularly because not only is that line pretty weak even when the starters ARE in there, they never made any real adjustments to help the line last night against the Giants. At some point, they needed to put both a fullback and a tight end in the backfield to block for Rodgers because he was getting lit up. That's on the coaches. Same goes for the Bears' OC.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on November 26, 2012, 02:54:38 PM
Ultimately, though, the head coach has got to see that tackling is a problem (and I think it is for them)

Strongly disagree with that. SD is only 10th in the league in yards allowed per game, and 13th in scoring allowed. They held Bal to 10 points (an offense as a whole which is ranked 9th in scoring while averaging almost 26ppg) before the 4th and 29. Those are not the signs and stats of a team which is bad at tackling. The difference between this situation (a single, isolated play) and the Packers is that the Packers had issues all game and did not adjust. That is game time coaching errors on GB. For SD this is a couple players making mental mistakes, ones they don't normally make, at the same time.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 26, 2012, 05:38:32 PM
Eagles...can they win this game? My gut says they have to show up at some point against a Panthers team that has no fucking clue.

Still, how awesome did this matchup look in the summer when ESPN booked it? Vick v. Cam? The supposed NFC East pick vs the hot young rookie turned sophomore leader?

Oh fuck they have 5 combined wins in week 12  :why_so_serious:

EDIT: Or they can let Cam pick them apart for 14 before they know what's going on. "I've never seen wide receivers this open" - John Gruden.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Morat20 on November 26, 2012, 07:56:41 PM
I was watching the Texans game. As someone rooting for the Texans, I felt bad for Detroit on that play.

That being said: Their coach knew the rules, it wasn't like it was made last week. More importantly, and I realize my junior high football days are a mere dim memory in the ancient past, but our couch was kinda big on the "if the whistle ain't blown, the play ain't over" thing.

Wasn't a lot of excuse for the Detroit guys standing around with their thumb up their asses.

Still, had to hurt. He was pretty obviously down and they'd have never upheld the touchdown on review.

Watching both kickers choke was just as painful.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on November 27, 2012, 06:19:02 AM
What a shit game last night.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on November 27, 2012, 08:45:12 AM
Broncos can clinch this week with a Win or SD loss.  :awesome_for_real:

Just give us the "z" already.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on November 27, 2012, 08:49:29 AM
Broncos can clinch this week with a Win or SD loss.  :awesome_for_real:

Just give us the "z" already.


Count on the Jets loss!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on November 27, 2012, 09:00:22 AM
Broncos can clinch this week with a Win or SD loss.  :awesome_for_real:

Just give us the "z" already.


Count on the Jets loss!

Jets have nothing to do with this. If we win this week, we clinch. if SD loses to the Bengals, we clinch. We swept them so even if we end up both 8-8, we own the tiebreaker.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on November 27, 2012, 09:04:56 AM
I clearly wasn't paying attention.  I meant to say Chargers.

Fucking AFC.   :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on November 27, 2012, 09:15:19 AM
I clearly wasn't paying attention.  I meant to say Chargers.

Fucking AFC.   :uhrr:

Well, Chargers DO play the Jets in Week 16... so the comment kinda made sense.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 27, 2012, 09:29:29 AM
I hope the colts get in so Peyton may have to play his old team


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on November 27, 2012, 09:36:12 AM
I hope the colts get in so Peyton may have to play his old team

It's very likely that we'll get a Colts/Broncos Wildcard week 1 game. It would be fun to go through that and end up at the Super Manning Super Bowl. Peyton vs Eli in New Orleans.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on November 28, 2012, 04:28:39 PM
Eli never wins Manningbowls, DENIED.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on November 29, 2012, 01:22:49 AM
Eli against Peyton in a regular game?  Peyton wins.  In a Super Bowl?  I would put my money on Eli.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bungee on November 29, 2012, 05:29:38 AM
Ah, what's better than the Jets? Jets fans:

http://youtu.be/vi7Qv0aZGc0


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 29, 2012, 06:32:12 AM
We all just want a bit more Tebow!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on November 29, 2012, 06:36:18 AM
Eli against Peyton in a regular game?  Peyton wins.  In a Super Bowl?  I would put my money on Eli.

I think part of this is just how good NYG's front seven have been when they go to the big game.  Doesn't matter that you can read defenses if you're forced to throw hot or to your check-down every other down.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 29, 2012, 09:24:01 AM
Ah, what's better than the Jets? Jets fans:

http://youtu.be/vi7Qv0aZGc0

Wow, stay classy, Jets fans!

That's pretty damn close to Philly or Kansas City fans.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on November 29, 2012, 08:19:11 PM
KC fans don't yet deserve to be mentioned with Philly and NYJ fans do they? I know about the really classy injury cheer shit towards their QB this year but it should take years to make it into the same league as Eagles fans who are probably the worst fans for any american team in any sport.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on November 29, 2012, 09:02:29 PM
Philly fans are horrible in every sport ever. It's like some universal law of reality.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 29, 2012, 09:16:49 PM
Philly fans are horrible in every sport ever. It's like some universal law of reality.

Bad women, bad taxes, bad weather, and access to entirely too much beer.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on November 30, 2012, 06:40:01 AM
Phili fans are the worst.  Jets aren't even as bad as them, but they're close.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on November 30, 2012, 11:49:19 AM
KC fans don't yet deserve to be mentioned with Philly and NYJ fans do they? I know about the really classy injury cheer shit towards their QB this year but it should take years to make it into the same league as Eagles fans who are probably the worst fans for any american team in any sport.

No one is as bad as Philly fans. I did think the cheering of Matt Cassel's concussion was pretty shitty so they are probably on a par with Jets fans, despite not having a long history of shitty fan behavior.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: El Gallo on November 30, 2012, 07:53:19 PM
Not football but related.  I was once at a Pens-Flyers game wearing a Lemieux jersey.  I was surrounded on a concourse by a dozen or so guys chanting "we love cancer."

Gotta respect them for their consistency. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on November 30, 2012, 08:11:33 PM
Some men just want to watch the world burn.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 01, 2012, 08:26:56 AM
Jovan Belcher of the Chiefs apparently killed his girlfriend, then drove to the KC team facility and killed himself. And you thought their season couldn't get any shittier  :crying_panda:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 01, 2012, 08:34:07 AM
Apparently dude shot himself in front of GM/Coach.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on December 01, 2012, 01:25:39 PM
http://abcnews.go.com/US/kansas-city-chiefs-player-kills-stadium-suspected-fatal/story?id=17855478#.ULo8e2foors

Story


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on December 01, 2012, 03:23:39 PM
Is this another Junior Seau type medical situation?  Had a kid 3 months ago.  Tragic.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 01, 2012, 08:04:38 PM
and they are going to play tmw :wtf:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 01, 2012, 08:19:51 PM
This is just an awful story.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on December 01, 2012, 10:50:56 PM
Why do some of these fuckheads insist on fucking killing their fucking girlfriend along with them?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on December 01, 2012, 10:56:40 PM
I doubt it is premeditated. Sounds like he wigged out in an argument and shot her, then knew he was fucked and decided suicide was the solution. Pretty sad situation all around considering he basically came out of nowhere to build a decent NFL career.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on December 02, 2012, 05:49:34 PM
I have a feeling that Flacco is going to be one of those guys - he's all fuck yeah, I'm elite, and his play is maddeningly mediocre and he won't improve until a team actually cuts him and this shit will get second guessed forever. But at this point, with Flacco thinking he's elite, and his play being incredibly erratic, I don't see how you even come close to offering him the money he's going to want next year.

Because seriously, if you don't sail every fucking pass today, you beat a third string QB at home instead of a loss.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 02, 2012, 07:55:26 PM
I'm glad they finally benched the Sanchize. I mean how long have they blamed everyone but him?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 03, 2012, 12:12:29 AM
I am finally on board the Russell Hustle and Bustle Man Muscle Wilson bandwagon. They kid can fucking play. RGIII and Luck are getting all the attention, but he is getting it done too. Have I mentioned how much I enjoy watching Jay Cutler lose? He is such a cunt. Throws a ball into the dirt on 3rd and 2 and instantly starts crying at his receiver. Bears will never win it all with him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on December 03, 2012, 12:43:55 AM
I had the pleasure of getting to watch that game last night, and I have to agree.  The kid just oozes mojo, and he's ice cold under pressure.  He'll be even better when he gets it in his head that some of those DEs chasing him are just as fast as he is.  Also, Seattle was on the wrong side of every close call in that game.  How do they reverse that Braylon Edwards catch?  Only thing I can think of was karma getting it's revenge for the Green Bay game.

Regarding Cutler...I know people think he's a giant douche, but I think he's really, really good.  He played like a champ yesterday.  He is one gutsy motherfucker.  Yeah, he is a moody dick, and generally unlikable as a human being..  He yells at his own guys.  Not sure why he was yelling at the dude (Bush?) on that third and two, but I don't think it was for failing to catch the ball.  I guess I can't help but root for Cutler, despite the fact that everyone seems to hate him...or maybe because of it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 03, 2012, 08:55:16 AM
RGIII and Luck are getting all the attention, but he is getting it done too.

With a much, MUCH better defense then RGIII and Luck, yes Wilson is getting it done. I like Wilson, a good bit actually, but he's not quite up to RGIII and Luck...yet.

As for the Cutler hate, I'm with Cyrrex. He's a whiny bitch but he's a good player and does make Chi's offense (I use "offense" loosely to mean Cutler throwing to Marshall, or Forte when healthy) actually able to move the ball every now and then.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 03, 2012, 09:14:24 AM
I'm glad they finally benched the Sanchize. I mean how long have they blamed everyone but him?

I think the NFL owes whoever was forced to watch that game a goddamn refund... AND an apology. I saw the box score and that's just fucking sad. Remember that discussion on sports talk radio from a month or so back about college teams that think they can beat some pro teams? I think Alabama could have beaten both of these teams yesterday. A 3rd string QB comes out and not only wins the game, but plays better than the marquee franchise QB AND Tim Tebow? HI-LARIOUS. This is a fucking joke, right? Lindley gets only 72 yards passing, 2.3 per attempt but still has a better quarterback rating than Sanchez with his 3 picks? This game must have caused nosebleeds in children. How bad is Arizona? They lost this game, that's how bad. Everybody involved ought to be fucking ashamed of themselves.

I didn't check out many games yesterday - everything on the TV was either a foregone conclusion or teams I gave not a shit about. Seriously, Denver and Tampa? Denver has that division sewn up. New England and Miami? Even if Miami won somehow, they aren't winning that division. I did watch the Dallas/Philly game and despite my utter hatred of both teams, it was surprisingly entertaining. Foles might actually have turned a corner into competence. The whole game I kept saying to myself, "This game is going to be won by the first turnover." LOOK AT THAT. Bryce Brown is a good runner, but holy shit was a rookie mistake. He'd been asking for it all night. You do not sling the rock around like it's a fucking shot put, you retard, especially not when you are surrounded by defensive linemen. And of course, the Cowboys are so shitty, they almost let Philly back in the game. In fact, if Foles hadn't been such a rookie with that 2-point conversion, you could very well have lost that game in OT. He probably just thought Bryce Brown would drop the ball again.

As for Russell Wilson, yeah, he seems to have the skills. He must have to keep Matt Flynn on the bench after the money the Seahawks paid to get him. Look at the Kevin Kolb saga from two years ago for a preview of what will happen next year. No way Seattle keeps Flynn at that salary to be a backup. I hear Kansas City and Jacksonville are looking for a start QB... or will be once the season is over. With no can't miss QB prospect in the draft, I expect there to be some serious horse trading, with the Jets in the mix as well. Maybe KC can draft Matt Barkley #1 so we can see how Sanchize v 2.0 (which was itself a 2.0 version of The Leinart) does.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 03, 2012, 09:21:07 AM
Im still wondering how the Pats lost to cardinals (at home!)...oh and the Ravens lose to Charlie Batch...hah..hahah....hahahahaha.

Was Flacco whining after the game?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 03, 2012, 09:32:05 AM
Im still wondering how the Pats lost to cardinals (at home!)...oh and the Ravens lose to Charlie Batch...hah..hahah....hahahahaha.

Was Flacco whining after the game?

Was he still breathing?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 03, 2012, 09:32:14 AM
RGIII and Luck are getting all the attention, but he is getting it done too.

With a much, MUCH better defense then RGIII and Luck, yes Wilson is getting it done. I like Wilson, a good bit actually, but he's not quite up to RGIII and Luck...yet.

As for the Cutler hate, I'm with Cyrrex. He's a whiny bitch but he's a good player and does make Chi's offense (I use "offense" loosely to mean Cutler throwing to Marshall, or Forte when healthy) actually able to move the ball every now and then.

Not sure what his defense has to do with the quality of his play. Also, his defense folds like a circus tent in the 4th quarter  :heartbreak:

Stats-
Robert Griffin III, QB   WSH   205   304   67.4   2,497   8.21   88   16   4   25   104.6 227
Russell Wilson, QB   SEA   201   317   63.4   2,344   7.39   51   19   8   23   95.2   195
Andrew Luck, QB   IND   279   503   55.5   3,596   7.15   60   17   16   28   76.1   300

When sorted by QB rating, they are 3rd. 7th, and 29th in the league, respectively. Griffin wins on Completions, yards per, INTs, and rating. Wilson is ahead in TDs and sacks taken. Luck is only ahead in raw yardage. Unfortunately this doesn't show their rushing stats. All three are pretty damned good runners (RGIII is ridiculously fast, but both Wilson and Luck are good/great scramblers and dangerous).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 03, 2012, 09:56:02 AM
I still think it's Denver v. Green Bay in the Super Bowl. Nothing so far has shown me that the other teams are playing complete games on both sides of the ball.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 03, 2012, 10:49:18 AM
As much as I hate the Giants did you see what they did to Green Bay and SF this season? Oh and look who Denver has beaten this season....TB, Carolina, Kansas City, Oakland, San Diego (all putrid) New Orleans (mostly putrid) Cincy and Pitt (possibly playoff teams, do either scare anyone? No.) Against quality teams? Houston, Atlanta and New England? L L and L.

Green Bay? Wtf man. They are not a complete team. No run game, mediocre defense.

It's up in the air, but GB vs Den..gack. Well let's hope it doesn't come true because the amount of Manning/Rodgers ads might make your head explode.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on December 03, 2012, 11:09:17 AM
As much as I hate the Giants did you see what they did to Green Bay and SF this season? Oh and look who Denver has beaten this season....TB, Carolina, Kansas City, Oakland, San Diego (all putrid) New Orleans (mostly putrid) Cincy and Pitt (possibly playoff teams, do either scare anyone? No.) Against quality teams? Houston, Atlanta and New England? L L and L.

Green Bay? Wtf man. They are not a complete team. No run game, mediocre defense.

It's up in the air, but GB vs Den..gack. Well let's hope it doesn't come true because the amount of Manning/Rodgers ads might make your head explode.

You really just lumped TB and NO in with the rest of those terribad jokes?  TB's fourth-stringers looked rough against DEN yesterday, but they almost beat ATL minus a fourth-quarter comeback.

Even CAR isn't /that/ awful.  They're no KC/SD/NYJ. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ruvaldt on December 03, 2012, 11:16:31 AM
Yeah...I'm not seeing the Denver/Green Bay thing at all.  

Green Bay is a good team in a pretty good division, but I think the 49ers or the Falcons would make it to the Super Bowl before they do.  Maybe if Green Bay's defense was healthier, but they're not.  Denver is an above average team in a shitty division so they end up looking better than they really are.  The AFC West is a horror show.  The other teams aren't even mediocre, they're just plain bad.  The Ravens, Patriots, Texans or Colts would almost certainly end any aspirations of the Broncos to make it to the end.  They can beat wild card teams (Pittsburgh and Bengals...maybe Tampa), but so far that's about it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: kaid on December 03, 2012, 11:20:21 AM
As much as I hate the Giants did you see what they did to Green Bay and SF this season? Oh and look who Denver has beaten this season....TB, Carolina, Kansas City, Oakland, San Diego (all putrid) New Orleans (mostly putrid) Cincy and Pitt (possibly playoff teams, do either scare anyone? No.) Against quality teams? Houston, Atlanta and New England? L L and L.

Green Bay? Wtf man. They are not a complete team. No run game, mediocre defense.

It's up in the air, but GB vs Den..gack. Well let's hope it doesn't come true because the amount of Manning/Rodgers ads might make your head explode.

I think for green bay it will really depend if we can get key players back for the final push and the playoffs. Right now our O line and defense are hurting bad with some major players out. The fact that we are still other than that fluke game vs the giants beating everybody is a testament to our coaches ability to get 2nd and 3rd stringers to play their butts off. We finally got one of our major offensive weapons back and then lost another hopefully not for long. Its kind of like our last super bowl run hanging in there and playing hard despite the number of injuries we have.

Even with the injury depletions I still think the packers could beat any team they face on any given day. Just look at what we did to the texans they are 11-1 but when they faced the pack we just completly wtf shut them down. Right now pack is in good position getting into the play offs 3 of our 4 last games are vs divisional opponents if we win those we are pretty much a lock on the division title.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 03, 2012, 11:27:50 AM
TB, Carolina, Kansas City, Oakland, San Diego (all putrid)

Really?  You lump Tampa Bay in with those other teams?  The Bucs are 6-6, which includes 3 very close last minute losses, yet they're still just 1 game behind Seattle for the last NFC wild card spot.  You call that putrid?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 03, 2012, 11:29:05 AM
Yeah...I'm not seeing the Denver/Green Bay thing at all.  

Green Bay is a good team in a pretty good division, but I think the 49ers or the Falcons would make it to the Super Bowl before they do.

I might agree with you about the 49ers, but not the Falcons. Until they can show they can win a playoff game, I'm still going to doubt them seriously.

Quote
Maybe if Green Bay's defense was healthier, but they're not.

I will remind you that Green Bay won the Super Bowl with a SHITTON of injuries that year. They had lost Nick Barnett for the season, and didn't discover their running game til the playoffs. They also lost both Woodson and Sam Shields in the Super Bowl and still won. They are the type of team that can get hot and absolutely dominate. However, I agree with you about them being a complete team. As in, they are not. Their defense is still coming into shape and has LOTS of injuries and their offensive line is a goddamn joke. If the Bears had an offensive line, I'd be worried about them but as it is, I think Green Bay can win the division on the strength of beating the Bears twice. The second game against them will likely be a 14-10 affair with an assload of sacks.

Quote
Denver is an above average team in a shitty division so they end up looking better than they really are.  The AFC West is a horror show.  The other teams aren't even mediocre, they're just plain bad.

Agreed.

Quote
The Ravens, Patriots, Texans or Colts would almost certainly end any aspirations of the Broncos to make it to the end.  They can beat wild card teams (Pittsburgh and Bengals...maybe Tampa), but so far that's about it.

I don't think the Colts will beat the Broncos. But the other three could. Unfortunately, all the AFC teams have serious inconsistency issues - some days they are world beaters, some days it's just like WTF? If I were to go on best teams, I could see the Texans in the Super Bowl against the 49ers. But I wouldn't have enough confidence in that pick to put money on it, not with the crazy ass shit this season has on a weekly basis.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 03, 2012, 11:35:14 AM
If Atlanta is the most uninspiring 11-1, then Baltimore is the most uninspiring 9-3.  The Ravens have lost too much on defense to make up for their blah offense to get very far in the playoffs.  I could easily see the Broncos beating them if they played.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 03, 2012, 11:52:23 AM
Man I got sidetracked with this.  Ok so maybe TB is not putrid, they are only half-putrid.

Fuck it who the hell KNOWS with the AFC. Houston looks good on paper and has a bunch of wins but I don't trust them, they are the AFC equivalent of the Falcons. Baltimore? who the hell knows. They could've lost to Dallas and San Deigo (and the Pats for that matter). If they have home field advantage throughout the playoffs though they might be dangerous. Maybe Denver can do it, but I think their defense is suspect when it goes up against a good team (like the Pats). Von Miller goes invisible against the Pats.

As a Pats fan I want to say them, and I'll point out they lost their 3 games by a TOTAL of 4 points but for fucks sake. They usually cant finish teams off in the 4th quarter with their offense (unlike that clock killing drive against Miami on Sunday...fantastic!) ...which has basically been a problem for several years now (see the superbowl) and the defense ...aaaiiiiieeee!  Mind you if I'm running Miami I'm looking for a new QB anywhere, I mean shit if you can't put up 300 yards passing on the Pats defense you must TRULY suck.


All this being said the Giants fucking scare me. NFC is a 3 horse race , NYG, 49ers and Packers. The Giants beat both of those like borrowed asses. Unless they have one of those complete brain fart playoff games (which the Giants are capable of) I fully believe they will go to the Superbowl and Eli will pull it out of his ass again.

At which point I will poke my eye out with a burning stick.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on December 03, 2012, 11:59:03 AM
I think the NFL owes whoever was forced to watch that game a goddamn refund... AND an apology. I saw the box score and that's just fucking sad. Remember that discussion on sports talk radio from a month or so back about college teams that think they can beat some pro teams? I think Alabama could have beaten both of these teams yesterday. A 3rd string QB comes out and not only wins the game, but plays better than the marquee franchise QB AND Tim Tebow? HI-LARIOUS. This is a fucking joke, right? Lindley gets only 72 yards passing, 2.3 per attempt but still has a better quarterback rating than Sanchez with his 3 picks? This game must have caused nosebleeds in children. How bad is Arizona? They lost this game, that's how bad. Everybody involved ought to be fucking ashamed of themselves.

Yes, the Cardinals-Jets game (I no longer have DirecTV sub, and it was 1st half of network NFL fare, w/ the Steelers-Ravens the doubleheader game) was dreadful to watch. 137 total yards for the Cardinals, and until Sanchez got yanked, it looked like Arizona was going to prevail with neither side even sniffing the other's end zone. Cardinals, after sprouting (and it was obvious it was a very "fortunate" win streak) out of the gate with a 4-0 mark, have lost 8 straight.

On the Steelers-Ravens, that a huge win for Steelers, in Baltimore, with a 37 year old 3rd string QB. I had written the season off, but the defense is playing much better and if Ben comes back in form (a big if), they can win against any 2012 AFC squad. But they will have to battle off Bengals still for a wildcard (barring a total Raven collapse, given the Ravens hold a 2 game lead in the AFC North standings).

In betwixt the games, caught the Detroit Lions collapse and it was comical.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 03, 2012, 12:12:07 PM
Mind you if I'm running Miami I'm looking for a new QB anywhere, I mean shit if you can't put up 300 yards passing on the Pats defense you must TRULY suck.

Nah, Tannehill should be fine if the 'Fins can get anything resembling a decent WR for him to throw to.  Sorry, Hartline and Bess would be fine as #3 and #4 receivers, not so much as #1 and #2.

In other news, I think Titus Young wins the Dipshit of the Year award this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: cmlancas on December 03, 2012, 12:45:15 PM
If Atlanta is the most uninspiring 11-1, then Baltimore is the most uninspiring 9-3.  The Ravens have lost too much on defense to make up for their blah offense to get very far in the playoffs.  I could easily see the Broncos beating them if they played.

I'm starting to believe the NFL is becoming closer to the NHL in recent years.  You have your classically good teams (DET is to NE, SJ is to NYG), but there is no "sexy team" like the 16-0, 14-2,  13-3 teams who crush everyone save the top teams in the league.

Instead, it's becoming more "just get in," because anything can happen with the growing parity in the league.  It's more about getting hot at the right time versus smashing everyone for the entire season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 03, 2012, 01:20:02 PM
Mind you if I'm running Miami I'm looking for a new QB anywhere, I mean shit if you can't put up 300 yards passing on the Pats defense you must TRULY suck.

Nah, Tannehill should be fine if the 'Fins can get anything resembling a decent WR for him to throw to.  Sorry, Hartline and Bess would be fine as #3 and #4 receivers, not so much as #1 and #2.

I give Tennehill a pass this year because his receiving corp may be the worst in the league barring Jacksonville - and the Jags did have a #1 pick wideout. Miami just has NOTHING but Reggie Bush and yet they've won 5 games. I expected them to be horrid. That's what makes me think Philbin is a pretty damn good coach (or at least a good OC/Quarterbacks coach). Look how different the Packers offense is doing without him at OC this year. That's can't be a coincidence.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 03, 2012, 01:49:05 PM
Yeah...I'm not seeing the Denver/Green Bay thing at all.  

I base my reasoning on two things. QB Rating, and defensive sacks. The teams in the Super Bowl are usually in the top 5 in one of those categories. Sometimes both.

Giants were 6th and 3rd last year. NE was 3rd and 14th.
Green Bay was 3rd and 2nd in 2010. The Steelers were 5th and 1st.
NO was 2nd and 13th in 2009. The Colts were 9th and 16th (this explains why is was the largest margin of victory in a SB since 2003, actually)
Pitt was 17th and and 2nd in 2008. The Cardinals were 3rd and 14th.
Giants were 25th and 1st in 2007. The Pats were 1st and 2nd. (this is probably the biggest anolomy in the higher rated team losing)

EDIT: It's part of the reason why I don't believe Atlanta is real, as they are 7th and 16th by those ratings. Houston, however, is for real at 8th and 3rd.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ruvaldt on December 03, 2012, 02:05:23 PM
Well, Denver lost against those non-real Falcons all the same in week 2, and Peyton's performance in the post-season isn't exactly clutch.  We've seen him on Colts teams that were better than this Broncos team and they couldn't perform down the stretch.  I'm not saying he chokes, necessarily, but it has happened several times, and you still have to wonder.

Also, it's easier to run up a higher QB rating and defensive sacks when even your best divisional rival is 4-8.  4-8.

I'm not say they're not good.  They are good.  But they're not that good.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 03, 2012, 02:44:03 PM
The Falcons at home are ridiculously tough in the regular season. In fact they are 19-3 at home over the last 3 seasons. It's frankly uncanny how they can fall apart in the playoffs when they have home field, but they do. I don't really hold that loss on Denver since it was their first road game all season with Peyton.

Still, look at Denver's losses. Atlanta, Houston, New England. Pretty stellar teams, all in the first 5 weeks, two of those on the road. They've since gone 7 in a row with a total point differential of +105. Some of that is being the tallest midget in the AFC West, but 5 of their nine wins are outside their division.

I question if the Falcons have the defensive players in my mind to hang with a playoff QB facing them, especially since Asante Samuel is having shoulder issues in the secondary, and John Abraham is the only pass rush threat.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 03, 2012, 03:26:29 PM
Well, Denver lost against those non-real Falcons all the same in week 2, and Peyton's performance in the post-season isn't exactly clutch.  We've seen him on Colts teams that were better than this Broncos team and they couldn't perform down the stretch.  I'm not saying he chokes, necessarily, but it has happened several times, and you still have to wonder.

Also, it's easier to run up a higher QB rating and defensive sacks when even your best divisional rival is 4-8.  4-8.

I'm not say they're not good.  They are good.  But they're not that good.

Denver is second in the league in sacks with their nearest divisional rival at 4-8, but New England is 22nd in the league in sacks with their nearest divisional rival at 5-7.  Denver and NE both have nearly identical passing statistics (NE is 6th, Denver is 7th with just 22 yards separating them), but the big difference in their offenses is the Patriots have a much better running game this year (8th vs 22nd).  Of course the hallmark of Belichick teams is their efficiency so it's no surprise the Patriots are 1st in points scored, but the Broncos are 3rd in points scored (Texans surprisingly are 2nd, and the top NFC team in points scored?  The Bucs are 4th in the league, ahead of the Packers, Saints, Giants et al  :grin:).

On the other hand, the Denver defense is 3rd in yardage and 10th in points allowed vs 27nd and 14th for the Patriots (there's that efficiency again).  I think people aren't giving the Broncos enough credit as a team.

Reference: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2012/opp.htm (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/2012/opp.htm)
Defensive stats might change a bit after tonight's game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 03, 2012, 04:17:44 PM
The pats have lit up the Denver defense 3 times in the last year I'm not that concerned though who knows if our defense can't get off the field.

How come I seem to be the only one who is terrified of the giants?  (maybe its the psychological baggage of a pats fan)


Edit: miami's defense looked pretty darn good yesterday. Well except the last 7 minutes  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 03, 2012, 05:42:19 PM

Sea Def do really poorly against the pass in the 4th when on the road, at home they remain phenomenal though (first in the league actually in the 4th qtr, but 28th on the road)

As for what Defense has to do with quality of Wilson's play, a defense keeping the offense in the game by not allowing teams to get ahead allows the offense to be more balanced and pass less, reducing INTs, basically keeping the QB from having to go into bad situations and try forcing things. It's similar to a team with a good RB as it allows for balance in the offensive calls, which Sea also has, so does WSH, Indy not so much. I should add that originally the comment was "getting it done," which I took as leading his team to wins and not "quality of his play," but I still don't think Wilson is at Luck's or RG3's level anyhow.....yet. He's doing very well and I am impressed with him, but he doesn't deserve the coverage of the other two as he's not playing at the same level. However, to his credit, I don't think he's playing at their level for one simple reason, and that is because he simply does not have to play like the other two (thanks to a strong Def).

My thought process in comparing Wilson to Luck and RG3 in the spoiler
Here are the main stats for these three (rankings are sorted by rushing attempts, with Newton at #2 and Vick at #4)
player                        team  G    Comp Att    Yds          TD    Int     Att   Yds   TD
1. Robert Griffin III     WAS    11    206    305    2,504    16    4    98    660    6
3. Russell Wilson            SEA    12    201    317    2,344    19    8    66    298    0
5. Andrew Luck            IND    12    279    503    3,596    17    16    44    216    5

As for the Wilson vs Flynn and keeping both or not - that is real easy to do as Wilson is incredibly cheap right now, but they would be smart to deal Flynn while they can.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 03, 2012, 05:49:30 PM
As for the Wilson vs Flynn and keeping both or not - that is real easy to do as Wilson is incredibly cheap right now, but they would be smart to deal Flynn while they can.

They pretty much HAVE to deal Flynn at the end of the year. Wilson is cheap, but I don't see Flynn wanting to stay as the rookie's backup and he's pretty costly for a backup. Plus, there will be plenty of market for him still. KC, Jacksonville, Arizona (the Kolb thing might have scared them off trades), probably the Jets, maybe Oakland and Dallas and Buffalo (though all have money committed to current options), maybe even Philly or Tennessee or St. Louis. There's a good bunch of teams who could be considering upgrades at the position.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on December 03, 2012, 05:52:46 PM
Plus, there will be plenty of market for him still. KC, Jacksonville, Arizona (the Kolb thing might have scared them off trades), probably the Jets, maybe Oakland and Dallas and Buffalo (though all have money committed to current options), maybe even Philly or Tennessee or St. Louis. There's a good bunch of teams who could be considering upgrades at the position.

I really hope Rivers and Sanchez get moved to somewhere on that list. It'd be nice to see if a change of scenery might turn them back into good QB's. It will be interesting as fuck though to see where Alex Smith and to a lesser extent Flynn end up during the off season.


The pats have lit up the Denver defense 3 times in the last year I'm not that concerned though who knows if our defense can't get off the field.

How come I seem to be the only one who is terrified of the giants?  (maybe its the psychological baggage of a pats fan)


Edit: miami's defense looked pretty darn good yesterday. Well except the last 7 minutes  :grin:

Realistically you only need to ask in the AFC who can beat Tom Brady?

In the NFC, who fucking knows really what's going on. Whichever offensive line can play three complete games of not shit the bed football for a Bears/Packers/Giants/Saints type team maybe?

I think there are a ton of great playoff potential games to come that will tell us so much about how this year goes but right now I'm expecting Ravens v Steelers and Packers v Bears in the wildcard rounds. And I like a NFC North team versus Patriots in the SB if I'm guessing that far in advance though I never count AFC North teams out.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 03, 2012, 06:00:27 PM
Their defense is still coming into shape and has LOTS of injuries and their offensive line is a goddamn joke. If the Bears had an offensive line, I'd be worried about them but as it is, I think Green Bay can win the division on the strength of beating the Bears twice. The second game against them will likely be a 14-10 affair with an assload of sacks.

The only thing in this post I disagree with would be the score of that game, I think it will likely be a bit worse for the Bears, and that hurts to say.....it really hurts.



Mind you if I'm running Miami I'm looking for a new QB anywhere, I mean shit if you can't put up 300 yards passing on the Pats defense you must TRULY suck.

Nah, Tannehill should be fine if the 'Fins can get anything resembling a decent WR for him to throw to.  Sorry, Hartline and Bess would be fine as #3 and #4 receivers, not so much as #1 and #2.

I give Tennehill a pass this year because his receiving corp may be the worst in the league barring Jacksonville - and the Jags did have a #1 pick wideout. Miami just has NOTHING but Reggie Bush and yet they've won 5 games. I expected them to be horrid. That's what makes me think Philbin is a pretty damn good coach (or at least a good OC/Quarterbacks coach). Look how different the Packers offense is doing without him at OC this year. That's can't be a coincidence.

I'm with Haem on this giving Tannehill a pass. His WR really have been no-names until this year with Philbin and Tannehill making them look good <at times>. I don't think the Jags are all that bad at wideout though, very underrated with no one to throw to them and their rushing game being injured for almost the entire year. I do like Shorts and Blackmon can be good. They're not great, but I don't tihnk they're awful either.


The pats have lit up the Denver defense 3 times in the last year I'm not that concerned though who knows if our defense can't get off the field.

In Manning's 5th game as a Bronco he almost overcame a 31-7 difference in 5 minutes, that is the difference right now. He brought them within 10 and was about to bring them within 3 until a costly fumble (was it the 3rd or 4th on that day) in the red zone sealed the game. A team is never a shoe-in for a win if they're against Peyton, plain and simple.

They pretty much HAVE to deal Flynn at the end of the year. Wilson is cheap, but I don't see Flynn wanting to stay as the rookie's backup and he's pretty costly for a backup. Plus, there will be plenty of market for him still. KC, Jacksonville, Arizona (the Kolb thing might have scared them off trades), probably the Jets, maybe Oakland and Dallas and Buffalo (though all have money committed to current options), maybe even Philly or Tennessee or St. Louis. There's a good bunch of teams who could be considering upgrades at the position.

Absolutely agree, and I think they should both for Flynn's and for Sea's benefits. It does neither of them any good having an unhappy $7.25m backup to the $550k/yr rookie and $630k 2nd year as Flynn could be happy elsewhere while Sea can improve their team with cap space and some extra picks.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 03, 2012, 08:21:21 PM
Realistically you only need to ask in the AFC who can beat Tom Brady?

I think we're about to see it next Monday.

EDIT: And the Cowboys are sort of, kind of, HOLY HELL HOW ARE WE STILL IN THIS DIVISION?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ruvaldt on December 03, 2012, 09:26:06 PM
It's a weak division and the Giants come on strong at the end of the season.  They're up against the Saints, Atlanta and the Ravens; Giants win two out of three of those.  Dallas is up against Cinncy, Saints and the Steelers, which is a weaker schedule, but they'll likely only win one, maybe two of those.  Smart money is on the Giants, obviously.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on December 03, 2012, 11:17:54 PM
(http://pixel.nymag.com/imgs/daily/sports/2011/11/14/14_elimanning.o.jpg/a_250x375.jpg)

The worst part for me is that I came SO CLOSE to beating Ingmar in FFB tonight. I just needed Eli to Eli up one more TD or something. :(


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on December 04, 2012, 06:20:32 AM
I don't remember so many divisions being decided so early.  The NFC East always goes down to the wire and this year won't be any different, but the early dominance of the four division winners is impressive.  I hope it doesn't make for garbage time for the next 3 weeks.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 04, 2012, 09:50:02 AM
Or shows you how shit a large amount of teams are in this league. wtf.

Oh and so much for all my talk about how scary the Giants are , way to make me look stupid G-men (not that I'm enjoying the fact you lost to the Redskins bwahaha).

Please can someone kill Jon Gruden?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on December 04, 2012, 09:54:01 AM

Please can someone kill Jon Gruden?

Yes, please.  But don't use a handgun or Bob Costas will fuck you up.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 04, 2012, 10:00:25 AM
I actually like Gruden.  Yeah, he can be a bit ok, a *lot* over the top with the superlatives but at least he's actually informative when breaking down the actual play.  That makes him better than 75% of the rest of the color commentators.  Collinsworth is probably the best, though.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 04, 2012, 10:09:01 AM
I  :heart: Gruden for two reasons.

1 - He is one of the few guys out there who is brutally honest about calls on the field, both by coaches and refs.
2 - He gets into the game, no matter what. He ups the level of the broadcast even on a total crap game. Put him next to Gus Johnson and the enthusiasm level would blow up the booth.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on December 04, 2012, 10:10:46 AM
I also like Gruden.  His knowledge base is through the roof and he uses it to help the layman viewer see the game in greater detail. 

I really enjoy watching his QB camps. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 04, 2012, 11:49:10 AM
I like Gruden, when he's not verbally sucking-off anyone who makes a play for positive yards or a tackle for a loss after every whistle. If he toned that down a bit I'd like his broadcasts a lot more, still not as much as Colinsworth, but a lot more



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 04, 2012, 12:10:07 PM
I don't remember so many divisions being decided so early.  The NFC East always goes down to the wire and this year won't be any different, but the early dominance of the four division winners is impressive.  I hope it doesn't make for garbage time for the next 3 weeks.

We only have 4 out of 12 spots sealed up. Hell, Houston hasn't sealed up their own division yet.... It's really nothing outside the norm. Right about now is when we start seeing all the action.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on December 04, 2012, 12:23:25 PM
All of Gruden's good commentary is stained by his fawning, inane praise of the last guy to make a good play.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 04, 2012, 12:25:01 PM
All of Gruden's good commentary is stained by his fawning, inane praise of the last guy to make a good play.

It's not all a dance around the maypole. Still, would you rather have Gruden or Jaws? Think hard.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 04, 2012, 12:32:45 PM
After listening to the ridicolous amount of verbal fellatio going on I'd take kornheiser(sp) over Gruden at this stage. Even Tim McCarver doesnt make me want to much my own ears this much.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 04, 2012, 12:47:12 PM
Even Tim McCarver doesnt make me want to much my own ears this much.

That's simply crazy talk you are speaking, right there.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 04, 2012, 12:54:36 PM
I'd prefer if we had someone competent but not douchey to backup Tirrico. Gruden and Jaws both get too congratulatory to every player that makes a play. Kornhole is just a goddamn fucktard. I didn't mind Theismann that much though he's bitter and douchey as well. Maybe they should put Mike and Mike in the booth again. Those guys did a good job.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on December 04, 2012, 02:09:43 PM
I liked Gruden in the booth until about some point last year where it seems he cannot STFU -- incessantly speaking, it terribly annoying.

Bring back Howard! Or, wait, that would be zombie Howard Cosell…

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/--NP7oAEOtkA/UICwgO41NoI/AAAAAAAAF4M/3GO1_j8f1yU/s1600/IMG_4873b.JPG)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 04, 2012, 02:26:50 PM
I greatly preferred Jaws actually. He talked a lot, and did pay a lot of compliments, but not nearly as bad as this.

Then again, there's always alternatives .....


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 04, 2012, 05:19:49 PM
Before Dennis Miller turned into Conservatard, I actually liked him on MNF. Out of place, certainly, but I liked him better than Gruden or Kornhole.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on December 04, 2012, 07:00:49 PM
Gruden is excelent I have no idea what you are talking about. Dennis Miller had some really bright spots and was otherwise forgettable and that seems good for a third wheel.

Colinsworth is the best though.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on December 05, 2012, 02:08:23 AM
Collinsworth is the best by a vast margin.  I like Gruden's intelligence, but his biggest problem for me is that whichever quarterback currently has the ball in his hand just happens to be about the bestest thing in the history of forever.  He incessantly talks up the damn QBs, regardless of who he is or how he is actually performing.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bungee on December 05, 2012, 04:12:29 AM
Just watched NFL AM and this popped up:

(http://img855.imageshack.us/img855/3047/qbsg.png)

One is not like the others...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 05, 2012, 06:54:39 AM
There's nothing that brings a smile to my face quite like watching Philly crash and burn.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on December 05, 2012, 07:49:38 AM
I wish I had a good retort.  But I don't.  It is going to be tough next 2-3 years.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 05, 2012, 08:11:36 AM
Here's another trainwreck I love watching. http://sports.yahoo.com/news/jets-going-mark-sanchez-starting-134712083--nfl.html

So the Jets are starting Sanchez again. Holy hell, these guys don't learn! I love it!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on December 05, 2012, 08:14:39 AM
Here's another trainwreck I love watching. http://sports.yahoo.com/news/jets-going-mark-sanchez-starting-134712083--nfl.html

So the Jets are starting Sanchez again. Holy hell, these guys don't learn! I love it!

I guess they owe him 8 million whether he plays or not.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 05, 2012, 08:27:05 AM
That's the hilarious part. Seattle had the same issue and just played the guy who would win.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 05, 2012, 08:30:15 AM
Mike Vick gets paid $1 million per turnover.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on December 05, 2012, 08:45:25 AM
Mike Vick gets paid $1 million per turnover.  :why_so_serious:

My new favorite stat.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 05, 2012, 08:51:22 AM
I just have to comment on the  :awesome_for_real: choice of Mark Sanchez to start this weekend for the Jets. Go REX. Ride that Latino Pony into the unemployment line. But it's against Jacksonville and on the road where those mean Jets' fans can't hurt Markie Mark's feelings, so they'll probably win by like 13-7. Although if CHAD FUCKING HENNE beats them with this Jags team, there shouldn't be anything keeping Rex Ryan in a job except a payout clause.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 05, 2012, 09:47:37 AM
I'm enjoying this Jets season way more than I should be.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 05, 2012, 10:48:50 AM
That's the hilarious part. Seattle had the same issue and just played the guy who would win.

That's because Seattle has a guy who can win. Jets don't.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 05, 2012, 11:27:57 AM
To be fair, the Seahawks also have guys who can catch the ball. And guys who can run the ball. And guys who can play defense.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 05, 2012, 12:13:31 PM
That's because Seattle has a guy who can win. Jets don't.

As far as I can tell, McElroy would do the job better than Sanchez. He played basically 20 minutes of that last game, came in for the first series ever in the NFL, had the winning TD pass. Bilal Powell replaces Greene and comes up with 4.8 a carry and 58 yards. Both look better to my eye than their starting counterparts in terms of football savvy and skill.

Normally, these guys would be in there next week to start the game against a bad JAX team. Instead, toejam coach is going to play a QB with a worse passer rating than a rookie playing for the Browns. A guy who has been outplayed in his last two games by Charlie Batch.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 05, 2012, 12:23:14 PM
Greene is an overrated back if ever there was one. He's more inconsistent than any Cowboys back from the last 5 years.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 05, 2012, 02:33:54 PM
Greene is an overrated back if ever there was one. He's more inconsistent than any Cowboys back from the last 5 years.

I dunno how overrated he is.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on December 05, 2012, 02:37:17 PM
Brady and Eli are relative bargains!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on December 05, 2012, 02:45:58 PM
I wish I had a good retort.  But I don't.  It is going to be tough next 2-3 years.

Time to change your profile pic?  Maybe?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 05, 2012, 02:46:51 PM
I dunno how overrated he is.

He's about 30th in the league in y/carry. 20th in yards per game. There's a laundry list of guys you'd rather put in that position.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 05, 2012, 02:50:57 PM
I dunno how overrated he is.

He's about 30th in the league in y/carry. 20th in yards per game. There's a laundry list of guys you'd rather put in that position.

Yup! I was far from saying he was good. I just don't know anyone that has ever been huge on him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on December 06, 2012, 07:25:04 AM
I wish I had a good retort.  But I don't.  It is going to be tough next 2-3 years.

Time to change your profile pic?  Maybe?

Not a bad idea, actually.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on December 06, 2012, 07:26:33 AM
Question for the pundits: Why don't the Jets just play Tebow.  If he wins, great.  If he loses, it won't hurt the season and it will shut up the fans. 

Either way = win.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bungee on December 06, 2012, 07:34:36 AM
Question for the pundits: Why don't the Jets just play Tebow.  If he wins, great.  If he loses, it won't hurt the season and it will shut up the fans. 

Either way = win.

He's hurt (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000106436/article/tim-tebow-close-to-returning-to-game-action-for-new-york-jets).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on December 06, 2012, 07:36:24 AM
He's hurt (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000106436/article/tim-tebow-close-to-returning-to-game-action-for-new-york-jets).

I do read the news.  I meant when healthy.  He'll be good to go next week and doubling down on Sanchez is fuckstupid.

Maybe they could make a move for Alex Smith?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 06, 2012, 07:38:05 AM
If he loses, it won't hurt the season and it will shut up the fans. 

Ahahahahahahahahahahah ahha hahahahahahhaah aaaaa hahahahaah.

There are Denver fans that still insist that the broncos will be better off with Tebow. Tebow fans never learn and never shut up. It literally becomes "everyone else fucked up, not our lord and savior!"


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 06, 2012, 08:11:08 AM
I dunno how overrated he is.

He's about 30th in the league in y/carry. 20th in yards per game. There's a laundry list of guys you'd rather put in that position.

Yup! I was far from saying he was good. I just don't know anyone that has ever been huge on him.

After the playoffs in Sanchez's first year, everybody was like HE'S GOING TO BE HUGE!!!! They got rid of Thomas Jones to make him a feature back and he's never lived up to it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2012, 08:48:13 AM
Question for the pundits: Why don't the Jets just play Tebow.  If he wins, great.  If he loses, it won't hurt the season and it will shut up the fans. 

Either way = win.

It's a pride thing right now. Rex Ryan knows he's toast after this disaster of a season, so he has no reason to kiss the owner's ass in the hopes he stays employed. Woody Johnson loved the idea of Tebow as a draw, and he has no love for Sanchez. He wants him to play, and Rex hates Tebow's guts. Rex is just lording it over Woody, daring him to fire him today. Woody will never do that. He fired Mangini a day after the season was over. He traded Herm Edwards after the 2005 season was over. He's never fired a head coach mid-season while owner of the Jets, although Rex is really trying hard to make him pull the trigger.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 06, 2012, 09:59:24 AM
He's definitely going to be fine for now. Jets are still within reach of a playoff spot... they're not THAT bad record wise, and they have a decent rest of the season to play.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 06, 2012, 10:00:43 AM
They won't start Tebow because he would be WORSE.

Denver had a running game, and it appears they actually had decent receivers when the QB can get them the ball. They also had a good defense.

The New York Jets have none of those things.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on December 06, 2012, 10:03:57 AM
Once you open the Tebow box, it's pretty hard to shut it.   Your season now rests on the very broad shoulders of your hybrid halfback that can't throw a spiral.  I hope you have an easy schedule the rest of the way.

Guy does have a certain magic, however.  How else can you go 5/12 with 3 ints, 2 fumbles lost and still win?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 06, 2012, 10:11:50 AM
Guy does have a certain magic, however.  How else can you go 5/12 with 3 ints, 2 fumbles lost and still win?

Having a defense that allows you to keep within striking range.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2012, 10:13:26 AM
He's definitely going to be fine for now. Jets are still within reach of a playoff spot... they're not THAT bad record wise, and they have a decent rest of the season to play.

I disagree, the Jets are 5-7 and a total train wreck. It would take a small miracle for them to make the post-season. They can't score, they couldn't move the ball against a very bad Arizona team with Sanchez, and they are 2 back of the playoffs with 4 to go. Even if they win all 4, they have to hope both Pittsburgh and the Bengals lose 3 games, because you don't have H2H on the Steelers, and the kicker is that Pitt and Cincy play each other. On top of that, the Jets can hope the Colts lose out, and that Miami or Buffalo don't outplay them.

It's not happening. My guess is they go 8-8, same record as last year. That won't sit well with Woody at all.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 06, 2012, 10:16:46 AM
He's definitely going to be fine for now. Jets are still within reach of a playoff spot... they're not THAT bad record wise, and they have a decent rest of the season to play.

I disagree, the Jets are 5-7 and a total train wreck. It would take a small miracle for them to make the post-season. They can't score, they couldn't move the ball against a very bad Arizona team with Sanchez, and they are 2 back of the playoffs with 4 to go. Even if they win all 4, they have to hope both Pittsburgh and the Bengals lose 3 games, because you don't have H2H on the Steelers, and the kicker is that Pitt and Cincy play each other. On top of that, the Jets can hope the Colts lose out, and that Miami or Buffalo don't outplay them.

It's not happening. My guess is they go 8-8, same record as last year. That won't sit well with Woody at all.

Actually we agree. I don't think they will get there, but they still have a CHANCE of getting there. There is no reason an owner would toss a coach out in this position.

Jets are a terrible team.

The "decent" was only in the context of their schedule.

Jets are terrible. Tebow is terrible. Shonne Green is terrible.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on December 06, 2012, 10:19:47 AM
They won't start Tebow because he would be WORSE.

I agree.  Still, it's the fans that fund the team.  When the season is in the can, I'd show them how wrong they are just to put the whole thing to rest... best part, Tebow will suck enough to get them a higher draft pick!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 06, 2012, 10:23:52 AM
They won't start Tebow because he would be WORSE.

I agree.  Still, it's the fans that fund the team.  When the season is in the can, I'd show them how wrong they are just to put the whole thing to rest... best part, Tebow will suck enough to get them a higher draft pick!


IT DOESN'T EVER PUT IT TO REST.

The fans will blame everyone else. If he does it, he loses his job if only because of publicity/blame for Tebow sucking. It's never Tebow's fault. Ever.

The Jets are a fucking disaster. Tebow is a fucking albatross.

The starting QB for the Jets next season will likely be someone like Alex Smith or Matt Flynn. I fully expect Tebow to be straight up CUT. Enjoy the CFL, Jesus.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on December 06, 2012, 10:28:34 AM
As I said earlier, I wouldn't cut Tebow.  The guy has an amazing work ethic and some serious physical gifts.  I'd make him a TE.  He would excel at that position once you slathered his hands with stick'em. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2012, 10:28:50 AM
Actually we agree. I don't think they will get there, but they still have a CHANCE of getting there. There is no reason an owner would toss a coach out in this position.

Perhaps, but he fired Mangini off a 9-7 season. Granted, that was about the Jets going 8-3 and then choking down the stretch. Still, I think two years in a row of completely mismanaging the assets might get some hackles up.

Does McElroy have herpes or something? It's like everyone seems to forget he's on the team, or even thinks he's worth a discussion. He's a brilliant kid with a decent arm. I'd at least put somebody smart back there who makes good decisions.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 06, 2012, 10:32:09 AM
As I said earlier, I wouldn't cut Tebow.  The guy has an amazing work ethic and some serious physical gifts.  I'd make him a TE.  He would excel at that position once you slathered his hands with stick'em.  

So, you're saying he is terrible at TE too.

Plus, that ain't going to happen. Nobody wants Tebow after what he did in Denver. There were only two teams that showed ANY interest. The Jets and the Jags. Both wanted him for publicity/sales. He's done in the NFL.

Perhaps, but he fired Mangini off a 9-7 season. Granted, that was about the Jets going 8-3 and then choking down the stretch. Still, I think two years in a row of completely mismanaging the assets might get some hackles up.

Mangini got fired AFTER they missed the playoffs.

The Jets are still, tecnically, in the hunt. No owner is going to fire a coach then.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on December 06, 2012, 10:34:09 AM
I'm saying that Tebow isn't equipped to be an NFL QB, but is equipped to be an NFL player.

Combine Results (http://nflcombineresults.com/playerpage.php?f=Tim&l=Tebow&i=8644)

6'3", 240lbs, 4.7 40 yd, and a 38" vertical.  That's a good NFL TE.  He also has a working knowledge of how an offense runs.  

Hate the guy all you want.  He has some physical gifts AND a work ethic.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2012, 10:38:34 AM
The Jets are still, tecnically, in the hunt. No owner is going to fire a coach then.

I see you point, now. I think we both agree that he's not going to fire him mid-season. Do you think he fires him after the season?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 06, 2012, 10:49:40 AM
The Jets are still, tecnically, in the hunt. No owner is going to fire a coach then.

I see you point, now. I think we both agree that he's not going to fire him mid-season. Do you think he fires him after the season?

If they miss the playoffs, yes. These season has been a PR disaster for them and I think their hands are tied. I don't think they should fire him, really, but I think they do.

I'm saying that Tebow isn't equipped to be an NFL QB, but is equipped to be an NFL player.

Combine Results (http://nflcombineresults.com/playerpage.php?f=Tim&l=Tebow&i=8644)

6'3", 240lbs, 4.7 40 yd, and a 38" vertical.  That's a good NFL TE.  He also has a working knowledge of how an offense runs. 

Hate the guy all you want.  He has some physical gifts AND a work ethic.

I don't actually hate the guy... well.. I do dislike his attitude towards certain social topics, but... He's a great athlete, but he does not have what it takes to be an NFL player... yet, maybe.

A good TE has to catch. A great TE can block/catch. However, you yourself said he would need stickum. That means he can't catch. Meaning, he sucks at the NFL.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 06, 2012, 11:00:44 AM
Question for the pundits: Why don't the Jets just play Tebow.  If he wins, great.  If he loses, it won't hurt the season and it will shut up the fans.  

Either way = win.

Tebow winning is a bad outcome in a long-term sense. Everyone with any sense is close to certain he will never put together sustained success as an NFL QB; if you put him in and he gets lucky you just signed yourself up for a bunch more failure or fan unrest down the road. The only "win" is to bury him and then cut him in the offseason on a day when the Yankees do something stupid.

EDIT: As for the TE stuff, why would someone burn a roster spot trying to see if he could maybe have success at another position? Shitloads of TEs come out with moderate size and speed numbers like his every year, I'd bet. Maybe not as fast, but with actual experience blocking, catching, running routes, etc. And far less distracting.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2012, 11:00:55 AM
I do dislike his attitude towards certain social topics, but...

That commercial with he and his mom where she's like, "If we had an abortion, we wouldn't have Tim." Every Georgia fan marked that date in time down. If we ever invent a time machine, some Dawg fan is heading back there first.

EDIT: Correction, if some Georgia Tech guy invents a time machine and we steal it...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 06, 2012, 11:07:25 AM
Hell, if we're basing this off his physical stats, make him a pass rushing defensive end!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on December 06, 2012, 11:09:24 AM
Hell, if we're basing this off his physical stats, make him a pass rushing defensive end!

His bench wasn't listed, implying he lacks the strength for it.

He could block a LB, but I doubt he could deal with an O-line man.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Stewie on December 06, 2012, 11:10:20 AM
I'm saying that Tebow isn't equipped to be an NFL QB, but is equipped to be an NFL player.

Combine Results (http://nflcombineresults.com/playerpage.php?f=Tim&l=Tebow&i=8644)

6'3", 240lbs, 4.7 40 yd, and a 38" vertical.  That's a good NFL TE.  He also has a working knowledge of how an offense runs. 

Hate the guy all you want.  He has some physical gifts AND a work ethic.

All you have to do is watch hard knocks from this year. Miami had a guy that had great "measurables" trying to make the team as a TE  he was heavily focused on by hard knocks. The reality is that blocking in the nfl is hard and if you haven't been doing it for quite a while you probably aren't going to be good at it. Tebow would most likely fall into that category. Hell if he cant even fix his throwing motion what hope is there that he will be able to learn proper blocking technique?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on December 06, 2012, 11:11:22 AM
Roger Goodell mooting getting rid of kickoffs (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000106654/article/roger-goodell-mulling-over-idea-of-eliminating-kickoffs)

I'm not sure what to make of this. Kickoffs can produce some of the most exciting plays in any game, but the risk vs reward seems heavily skewed towards risk, and touchbacks are just boring.

I quite like the alternative idea put forward by Greg Schiano

Quote
After a touchdown or field goal, instead of kicking off, a team would get the ball on its own 30-yard line, where it's fourth and 15. The options are either to go for it and try to retain possession or punt. If you go for it and fall short, of course, the opposing team would take over with good field position. In essence, a punt replaces the kickoffs.

You'd probably need to tinker with the length and field position, but this could be a fun compromise, and better for players since as far as I am aware there are relatively fewer injuries on punts than kickoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on December 06, 2012, 11:13:07 AM
The reality is that blocking in the nfl is hard and if you haven't been doing it for quite a while you probably aren't going to be good at it. Tebow would most likely fall into that category. Hell if he cant even fix his throwing motion what hope is there that he will be able to learn proper blocking technique?

Very true.  I'm just saying that you've spent a gob of money on the guy.  You might as well try to find a way to put him on the field before his contract runs out.  Worst case, he's a 3rd string TE and a 4th string QB until you release him.

I think they are trying to pawn him off on another team as a backup QB and figure that is how they will get the best value for him.  I was speaking more as a usefullness point rather than a $$$ view.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on December 06, 2012, 11:16:02 AM
I think removing kick offs is a good thing.  Kickoff and punt is how I got most of my field time in college and largely how I received so many concussions.  It's really a very dangerous part of the game.  I imagine that it's still in the game because fans like it and the players on special teams are replaceable cogs. 

Owners would love to get rid of it as it would allow them to add depth to their offensive and defensive rosters without having to worry about kickoff performance as a factor.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 06, 2012, 11:21:01 AM
Going for it on the 4th and 15 would certainly make it exciting. I wonder though if that's easier than onside kicking it (well if you are playing the San Deigo Chargers it would be). Definate advantage to the teams with the good quarterbacks?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 06, 2012, 11:23:18 AM
Getting rid of kickoffs is something I'd abhor... but you know what I hate more? Watching some guy get paid above league minimum to kick a ball into the fucking endzone sandwiched in between two VERY LONG commercial breaks. Moving the kickoff spot back to the 35 fucking sucked ass. It's made returns so few and kickoffs so boring I'd rather everybody just started on the goddamn 20. If you remove kickoffs, what happens with onside kicks? Good luck trying to win games from 10 points back now.

As for Tebow, they should have just made him a goddamn halfback. We KNOW he can run the ball. Everything else is debatable.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 06, 2012, 11:35:19 AM
Hell, if we're basing this off his physical stats, make him a pass rushing defensive end!

His bench wasn't listed, implying he lacks the strength for it.

He could block a LB, but I doubt he could deal with an O-line man.

Apparently I should have put some green text.

re: kicks. I'm not sure how putting more players directly in harms way solves the safety issue, which seems to be the crux of the change.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on December 06, 2012, 01:05:39 PM
The Jets might make the playoffs, but that won't mean they are good team.  Stranger shit has happened in the NFL before.  But who cares?  If they squeak into the post-season, we all know they won't be there for long.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on December 06, 2012, 01:23:57 PM
The Jets' path to the playoffs seems to rely on the Steelers, Colts, and Bengals all losing heavily in the next few weeks, which seems improbable.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2012, 01:45:40 PM
I really like what the Colts have going on.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on December 06, 2012, 01:47:05 PM
Who doesn't want to see Colts-Broncos in the playoffs?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on December 06, 2012, 01:58:22 PM
Bob Costas would go in all guns blazing if that happened.  Shoot, I bet he'd be fired up to pull the trigger on an explosive broadcast of that caliber.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2012, 02:44:35 PM
Bob Costas would go in all guns blazing if that happened.  Shoot, I bet he'd be fired up to pull the trigger on an explosive broadcast of that caliber.

 :oh_i_see: :roll:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on December 06, 2012, 11:16:30 PM
As for Tebow, they should have just made him a goddamn halfback. We KNOW he can run the ball. Everything else is debatable.

This.  Dude is on a team with a terrible QB and virtually no effective passing game.  He can run.  Get him in the backfield as an HB/FB, as a TE or even a WR in motion for at least 50% of your snaps.  Give him the ball and let him run it at least 10 times a game.  Every so often, let him have a throwing option...he has no head for the QB position and his mechanics stink, but he could still be a real threat to throw in the right situations, and you have to make sure the defense knows he might throw it every time he touches the ball.  In the right hands, this is one dangerous weapon.  Wildcat 2.0.

But I totally understand why Rex doesn't put him in as QB.  First, because he is likely to perform poorer.  And if he actually outperforms Sanchez?  That is worst case scenario.  Lose/lose.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 07, 2012, 12:24:45 PM
SpeedWolf came back from tour and restocked their online site, so I snagged one of these. <3




Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 08, 2012, 03:54:55 PM
Apparently one of the Cowboys NT killed one of the practice squad guys this morning while he was driving drunk.  :facepalm: :?

So, he's going to jail. Oh and the kicker? He'd already had a previous DUI 3 years ago. My guess is this one will stick. It's a fucking awful week for the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 09, 2012, 01:26:47 PM
Now the Bucs are up to 4 very close last second losses.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on December 09, 2012, 02:42:51 PM
Go Browns...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on December 09, 2012, 02:56:32 PM
Hmm I wonder in what spectacular fashion the Lions will lose tonight?  Last second pick six?  Safety?  The Goodyear Blimp crashing into Ford Field?  Hey Detroit, do me a favor and get blown out right off the bat so I don't have to stay up and watch the Packers smother you in the nursing home.

Also, a Browns fan with faint hope.  Adorable!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 09, 2012, 03:49:25 PM
Wow Arizona is taking shitty to terrifying new levels in the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 09, 2012, 08:24:51 PM
Oh and Dallas is above .500, and the Falcons shit the bed against the lowly Panthers and Cam  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on December 09, 2012, 08:29:03 PM
Ahhh man I just live defensive linemen getting to run in touchdowns.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 09, 2012, 08:37:09 PM
Wow Arizona is taking shitty to terrifying new levels in the NFL.

It's really amazing that they beat the Patriots in New England earlier in the year. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 10, 2012, 08:03:18 AM
Wow Arizona is taking shitty to terrifying new levels in the NFL.

It's really amazing that they beat the Patriots in New England earlier in the year. 

Cardinals started strong. 4-0. Injuries are somewhat to blame to a certain extent, but they haven't been exactly "high powered" this season, and suffer from not having a good QB.

This is an epic collapse.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 10, 2012, 08:21:00 AM
Wow Arizona is taking shitty to terrifying new levels in the NFL.

It's really amazing that they beat the Patriots in New England earlier in the year. 

And if the Pats miss a first round bye by one game ... :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 10, 2012, 08:25:34 AM
Wow Arizona is taking shitty to terrifying new levels in the NFL.

It's really amazing that they beat the Patriots in New England earlier in the year. 

And if the Pats miss a first round bye by one game ... :uhrr:

They would be doing as the patriots do?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2012, 08:41:10 AM
I'm glad I didn't watch a lot of games yesterday. Any non-Seattle fans forced to watch that mockery of a game ought to be paid reparations. 58-0? Seriously? Fuck's sake, it ought to have been obvious weeks ago that neither Lindley or Skelton knew what the fuck they were doing at QB. Surely there's SOMEBODY not signed by a team out there that could be better than this. Kerry Collins, Duante Culpepper, Jon Kitna, Kurt Warner, Donovan McNabb? Shit, McNabb couldn't do this bad if he tried. Kevin Kolb is obviously never going to be injury proof enough to be a starter, especially not behind that line. Time to cut bait on all three and start again.

LOL STEELERS. You lost to the fucking CHARGERS, AT HOME, in a 1:00 GAME. You should have been able to ride the Laz-y-Boy to victory. Instead, you only make it close when it's out of reach. And you don't even have the excuse that the Rapist was injured. If they even make the playoffs, I expect a first-round exit.

HOLY FUCKBALLS, GIANTS. Thanks for waking up only AFTER I bench Eli in my fantasy leagues. And thanks Ravens for fucking me in the JV League by damaging RG3's knee. At least I have Eli, though I'm sure he'll go into a late season tailspin now that I have to play him again.

Some epic collapses yesterday. Atlanta, Balitmore, fucking Buffalo, LOL CHICAGO and yet the goddamn Jets won. Sanchez looked like dogshit, but at least he didn't lose them the game. They are STILL in the playoff hunt, if for no other reason than the fucking Steelers and Bengals can't close.

And speaking of collapses, LOLLIONS. I got really worried there when the Packers couldn't stop the running game early. But then they did. And they got their own running game going. Having Alex Green rush so well against the Lions' front 7 was really encouraging. If the Packers win that division, based on how bad the Bears played, you can blame it solely on the Bears' offensive line. Cutler gets hit too much and they pull him for Campbell to make sure he doesn't get fucking killed. If Cutler goes down again this year, the Bears are sunk and they STILL might be sunk with him.

Is it just me or has O Line play in general gotten MUCH shittier this year? Lots of teams that just cannot seem to block for shit and getting their QB's killed.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on December 10, 2012, 08:46:35 AM
I'm glad I didn't watch a lot of games yesterday. Any non-Seattle fans forced to watch that mockery of a game ought to be paid reparations. 58-0? Seriously? Fuck's sake, it ought to have been obvious weeks ago that neither Lindley or Skelton knew what the fuck they were doing at QB. Surely there's SOMEBODY not signed by a team out there that could be better than this. Kerry Collins, Duante Culpepper, Jon Kitna, Kurt Warner, Donovan McNabb? Shit, McNabb couldn't do this bad if he tried. Kevin Kolb is obviously never going to be injury proof enough to be a starter, especially not behind that line. Time to cut bait on all three and start again.

(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33271127/brett-favre.jpg)

 :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 10, 2012, 08:49:17 AM
Is it just me or has O Line play in general gotten MUCH shittier this year? Lots of teams that just cannot seem to block for shit and getting their QB's killed.

I think it's more the athleticism of the DEs/LBs. People Like Watt and Von Miller are much faster and dominating than in recent years. Also, lots of young and fast CBs/Safetys keeping coverage tight. Just think the game is a little different.

Just taking a brief look briefly at the stats, and they seem more or less consistent with last year at least, in terms of sacks. Some spikes... Rodgers is leading with 42.

Edit: Cam Cameron fired by Ravens. Lawl.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 10, 2012, 08:54:05 AM
Vince Young wants to QB for Arizona. (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1439237-vince-young-still-begging-for-a-job-but-should-any-nfl-teams-listen) Could it be any worse??


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on December 10, 2012, 08:59:24 AM

Ouch.  Spoilered for the squeamish.

That Cardinals game... I fell asleep in the first half. I'm really glad I did.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2012, 09:19:58 AM
OWWWWWWWWWWWW GODDAMNIT A KNEE IS NOT SUPPOSED TO BEND THAT WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   :ye_gods: :ye_gods: :ye_gods: :ye_gods: :ye_gods:

Oh yeah, I forgot Vince Young said he wanted to QB for the Cards. Sad to say, he'd be an improvement.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2012, 09:27:44 AM
As for O line regression, I don't think the defensive talent has changed up front all that much. I think that NFL GMs are putting less emphasis on line players, and more emphasis (if not too much) on skill players. Teams that have what they consider to be awesome QBs are more likely to spend picks on getting him weapons and defense than protecting him with lineman.

So let's take a look at the teams we know have had franchise QBs. Brees, Rodgers, Brady, Manning (in Indy).

Brees gets there in 2006. So I looked at their first round picks from 2007-2012. They went WR, DT, CB, CB, RB, Forfeited.
Pats realize what they have in Brady after 2003 and the SB. I start there from 2004-2012. They go TE, G, RB, S, Forfeited, S, CB, OT, LB.
Manning gets to Indy in 1998 as the #1, so I start in 1999. They go RB, LB, WR, DE, TE, SS, CB, RB, WR, Traded, RB, DE.
Rodgers started in 2008, so we look at 2009-2012. They go DT, OT, OT, LB.  

So of those teams with the best QBs, only the Pats and Packers addressed the offensive line in the first round of the draft.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 10, 2012, 09:28:17 AM
Cardinals are like dead last in O-Line rankings... no QB is going to be an improvement.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 10, 2012, 09:31:43 AM
As for O line regression, I don't think the defensive talent has changed up front all that much. I think that NFL GMs are putting less emphasis on line players, and more emphasis (if not too much) on skill players. Teams that have what they consider to be awesome QBs are more likely to spend picks on getting him weapons and defense than protecting him with lineman.

So let's take a look at the teams we know have had franchise QBs. Brees, Rodgers, Brady, Manning (in Indy).

Brees gets there in 2006. So I looked at their first round picks from 2007-2012. They went WR, DT, CB, CB, RB, Forfeited.
Pats realize what they have in Brady after 2003 and the SB. I start there from 2004-2012. They go TE, G, RB, S, Forfeited, S, CB, OT, LB.
Manning gets to Indy in 1998 as the #1, so I start in 1999. They go RB, LB, WR, DE, TE, SS, CB, RB, WR, Traded, RB, DE.
Rodgers started in 2008, so we look at 2009-2012. They go DT, OT, OT, LB.  

So of those teams with the best QBs, only the Pats and Packers addressed the offensive line in the first round of the draft.

I am terrified at the contact negotions for Clady that will be happening for the Broncos after the season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on December 10, 2012, 09:51:13 AM
As a side topic, I thought you'd enjoy this article I came across.

The 32 Worst First Round Picks in NFL History (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/980759-32-worst-first-round-picks-in-nfl-history?source=taboola)

Some interesting and obscure tidbits in this one.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on December 10, 2012, 10:31:27 AM
Time to find out just how much the monobrow QB sucks and how much was Cam Cameron's inability to call the occasional screen or slant pass or his habit of forgetting that he has Ray Rice on his team. 

http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/2012/12/jim-caldwell-will-now-be-calling-plays-for-the-ravens-offense.html



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2012, 10:45:32 AM
I'm sure it will be fine.

(http://cdn.ksk.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/caldwell-fired.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 10, 2012, 11:32:27 AM
Keep in mind tha the next game up is the Broncos, and this could very well be the fight for the second seed. I think that probably played into this a bit.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2012, 11:37:26 AM
It isn't like Cameron hasn't had years to get that shit straight. But even with a great running game and then Boldin, the team has never been able to have a good, consistent offense. Flacco's road troubles really highlight that SOMETHING had to change. Will Caldwell help? Don't know, since I couldn't really tell how much of his coaching success was inheriting Tony Dungy's team and Peyton Manning or true acumen. Last season would point to he won't really help much considering how bad the Colts offense was without Manning.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 10, 2012, 12:07:53 PM
As fun as it was to laugh at the 2011 Colts, and while I agree he probably won't help much if he can't get Flacco playing at the level in which Flacco wants to be paid for, I don't put it squarely blame the 2011 season on him and the lack of Manning. They also had no running game and very little defense (iirc they set some record for allowing yards or allowing completions or something?)...it was a shitty season with lots of personnel  issues for the Colts that were exposed when teams don't have to completely focus on ways to attempt preventing Manning from tearing apart your defense.

Though, it will be interesting to see if Caldwell can take advantage of using something he's not used to having (a running back) and missing something he was pampered with (a future hall of fame QB)



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 10, 2012, 12:13:53 PM
As for O line regression, I don't think the defensive talent has changed up front all that much. I think that NFL GMs are putting less emphasis on line players, and more emphasis (if not too much) on skill players. Teams that have what they consider to be awesome QBs are more likely to spend picks on getting him weapons and defense than protecting him with lineman.

So let's take a look at the teams we know have had franchise QBs. Brees, Rodgers, Brady, Manning (in Indy).

Brees gets there in 2006. So I looked at their first round picks from 2007-2012. They went WR, DT, CB, CB, RB, Forfeited.
Pats realize what they have in Brady after 2003 and the SB. I start there from 2004-2012. They go TE, G, RB, S, Forfeited, S, CB, OT, LB.
Manning gets to Indy in 1998 as the #1, so I start in 1999. They go RB, LB, WR, DE, TE, SS, CB, RB, WR, Traded, RB, DE.
Rodgers started in 2008, so we look at 2009-2012. They go DT, OT, OT, LB.  

So of those teams with the best QBs, only the Pats and Packers addressed the offensive line in the first round of the draft.

This is what has always driven me nuts about the mouthbreathers here in New England that each April demand that the Pats draft a game changing WR. How many times does a good WR touch the ball in a game (so actually perform his primary job of catching passes), maybe 8-10 times a game? How many times does a O-line player have to perform his job in the game? Every. single. offensive. snap. So in terms of pure efficiency you're better off spending your 1st round picks on O-lineman anyway. Brady's best receiving weapons over the last 11 years? Branch (2nd round) Welker (a traded 2nd round pick) Moss (traded 4th round pick) Gronk (2nd round) Givens (7th round) etc etc. I understand that you have to have a good to great QB (and go ahead spend a first round pick on him, you might as well, cause without one you are probably fucked anyway)...but if he can't stay upright and you can't have some sembelance of a running game forget it.

It's not rocket science but it amuses me no end that it's not only the mouth breathers in NE who drool for a 1st round WR talent it's also the national media and all the supposed football 'experts'....Yeah hows the Detroit Lions doing? How I despise ESPN.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2012, 12:30:48 PM
To be honest, the WR position is one that is VERY overrated. They call it a skill position but can you think of 10 WR that are game-changers? Off the top of my head, I'd label Calvin Johnson, Larry Fitzgerald, Wes Welker, Brandon Marshall and maybe Andre Johnson. Both Fitzgerald and Marshall and Andre Johnson from last year's playoffs are examples of WR not being enough of a factor to overcome having a shitty QB. I would have rated Boldin but he went to Baltimore and immediately fell off the fucking radar. Calvin Johnson may be the only real BEAST on that list but his numbers are skewed by the Lions' almost complete lack of a running game or any receiver around him being worth a fuck. Welker is more of a possession receiver whose biggest impact is just actually catching most of the balls thrown his way (caught 69.2% of balls thrown his way this year - next closest is Dez Bryant with 68% on 30 less targets). A lot of the other top guys I consider so good because of who is throwing to them (like all the Packers' wideouts) as much as anything.

O line is much more important but it isn't sexy. It's more important than RB or WR or TE and about on par with QB and most defensive positions. Good teams have won with mediocre QB that they protected. Teams like the Bears have won based on great individual performances (Cutler/Forte/Marshall) or defense or both. And the Bears D has won with turnovers, which when they dry up, leaves the defense high and dry.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 10, 2012, 12:42:20 PM
I think AJ Green probably deserves to be on that list.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2012, 12:57:26 PM
I looked at teams that took a WR in the first round to see what happened:

2011 - Bengals, Falcons, Chiefs take WRs. Bengals and Falcons get obliterated in the playoffs, Chiefs don't make it.
2010 - Broncos and Cowboys take WRs. Cowboys don't make the playoffs that year or the following year. Broncos don't make the playoffs in 2010, luck out against Pitt in 2011 and get demolished by the Pats.
2009 - Niners, Eagles, Giants, Titans take WRs. Niners took Crabtree. Niners didn't make the playoffs until 2011, and Crabtree was a non-factor. Giants took Hakeem Nicks. He's probably the biggest difference maker so far on the list with his play in 2011 postseason. Titans and Eagles are...well they are stupid.
2008 - Nobody took a WR! This may be known as the draft of horrible mistakes. As an example, Oakland took Darren McFadden 4th. Meanwhile Chris Johnson, Matt Forte, and Ray Rice were on the board. Biggest steal went to the Saints who drafted OT Carl Nicks in the 5th round. Wonder why they won the Super Bowl the next year?
2007 - Detroit, Miami, KC, New Orleans, San Diego, and Indy take WRs. The only pro-bowler on that list is Calvin Johnson, and he's done fuckall to win them a playoff game. The lions also had the first ever 0-16 in 2008.

So, I'm just going to go ahead and say that taking a WR in the first round is probably the absolute dumbest thing you could possible do, unless his name is Hakeem Nicks, and you have 2 years to wait for it, and you draft a pro-bowler DE the following year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 10, 2012, 01:05:20 PM
Crabtree has been a big factor this year, it should be pointed out.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2012, 01:11:48 PM
Crabtree has been a big factor this year, it should be pointed out.

5 TDs, 28th in yards. One difference making TD catch in a game against the Rams that caused a tie. I'd still take the lineman.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 10, 2012, 01:12:15 PM
It's almost like you can't adequately hold one player in a vacuum as for the reason for the success or failure of a team! Also, WRs have to rely on another player for their stats.

Any of the teams up there that had bad years have a LOT more to blame than just drafting a WR in the first round.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2012, 01:13:48 PM
True, but I think it's a good red flag for "HEY MY GM IS MAKING TERRIBLE DECISIONS!"


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 10, 2012, 01:13:59 PM
Crabtree has been a big factor this year, it should be pointed out.

5 TDs, 28th in yards. One difference making TD catch in a game against the Rams that caused a tie. I'd still take the lineman.

Well, and we did. Another linemen on the 49ers wouldn't make much of a difference.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2012, 01:15:52 PM
Well, and we did. Another linemen on the 49ers wouldn't make much of a difference.

You've given up the 5th most sacks in the NFL. I disagree.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 10, 2012, 01:18:43 PM
A lot of that (and also the low INT total) boils down to Alex Smith actually being told by the coaching staff to take a sack instead of throwing it away and risking a turnover. A larger proportion of 49er sacks are QB-fault sacks because of this. I think the numbers that the running game puts up are a better indicator of how good the 49ers O-line is.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 10, 2012, 01:22:21 PM
A lot of that (and also the low INT total) boils down to Alex Smith actually being told by the coaching staff to take a sack instead of throwing it away and risking a turnover. A larger proportion of 49er sacks are QB-fault sacks because of this. I think the numbers that the running game puts up are a better indicator of how good the 49ers O-line is.

What he said. I'd put the Niners front line in the top 5, easily. Individual stats in a vacuum don't mean a whole lot. There is too much context that is needed.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 10, 2012, 01:27:53 PM
I think there is definitely an argument for Green. I also think there are arguments to be made for Vincent Jackson and Reggie Wayne. I put Bowe in the same category as Boldin, and am borderline on Roddie White with how well he still did last year while Ryan was sucking ass as he continues to produce with a lesser run game as support.



As for SF and their running game being good because their O-line is good, I'm not sold. It's possible, but Gore quite likely makes them look better than they are


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 10, 2012, 01:31:14 PM
Gore is great, sure, but Joe Staley pancaking a defender 20 yards downfield isn't happening because of anything Gore is doing.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2012, 01:37:19 PM
Top 3 worst teams in sacks allowed? Arizona, Green Bay and San Fran in that order. After that it's Chicago, San Diego and Philly. Of those 6 teams, only Philly (2), Arizona (3) and Green Bay (6) also are among the top 6 if QB hits given up. Philly (1), Arizona (2), Green Bay (4) and Chicago (5) are also among the league's worst in being tackled for a loss. Only Arizona was in any of those categories in 2011 (sacks).

Green Bay and San Fran WILL make the playoffs. Chicago might miss the playoffs. The rest of those teams are pretty fucking terrible. OL has a big effect on team performance, and QB performance in particular. DUH. I imagine Bears fans are wishing they had a line like Houston, which has only allowed 14 sacks all year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on December 10, 2012, 01:39:03 PM
True, but I think it's a good red flag for "HEY MY GM IS MAKING TERRIBLE DECISIONS!"

That's a stupid blanket statement because it depends on the team makeup and their position in the draft.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on December 10, 2012, 01:39:28 PM
That Houston stat is funny.  Didn't David Carr basically get sacked into oblivion their first few years?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2012, 01:41:27 PM
That Houston stat is funny.  Didn't David Carr basically get sacked into oblivion their first few years?

I blame David Carr being a bust on the fact that he took one too many disco biscuits to the head his first few years. He put up some good stats other than too many interceptions but anyone who watched his games could see he was always running for his fucking life.

Now that I think on QB's the Cardinals could have called, I wonder why Leinart wasn't on the list. Is he backing someone up already? I mean, he can't possibly do any fucking worse than Skelton and Lindley.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 10, 2012, 01:43:27 PM
Gore is great, sure, but Joe Staley pancaking a defender 20 yards downfield isn't happening because of anything Gore is doing.

No, but I've also seen a few of the Bear's OL making a block sometimes (it's happened, I SWEAR!). I'm not saying they're bad, just that I'm not entirely convinced they're great.

Green Bay and San Fran WILL make the playoffs. Chicago might miss the playoffs. The rest of those teams are pretty fucking terrible. OL has a big effect on team performance, and QB performance in particular. DUH. I imagine Bears fans are wishing they had a line like Houston, which has only allowed 14 sacks all year.

:heartbreak:

of the last 10 years, Chi has had 7 first round picks to draft someone, 3 were OL...and you see where we are with our OL.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2012, 01:45:33 PM
You have chosen... poorly.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 10, 2012, 01:50:21 PM
Hah, that is putting it very lightly!

Though we have picked a couple players who have played great...just not for us (see: Cedric Benson and Greg Olsen discounting his first year).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 10, 2012, 01:50:56 PM
You are right, one player in a vacumn doesn't make or break a team. My arguement is that in terms of how many plays a WR has to make vs a lineman it's simply ineffecient to draft a WR with a high pick. The only reason the Pats drafted TE's in the first round were because TE's are also useful in the blocking game (though Ben Watson and Daniel GRaham turned out to be mediocre anyway). This is essentially a statistical value premise and statistics only go so far but they sure do make a good starting point.

Then you need WRs who can run routes, HBs who can actually block, QBs who will make throws or get rid of the ball quick instead of tryin to be a hero on every play, coaches who can coach o-line and so forth.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2012, 01:51:08 PM
I never understood why the Bears got rid of Olsen. That guy was a solid pass catching tight end. I bet Cutler misses him a lot.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 10, 2012, 01:59:53 PM
Two part answer

1) Mike Martz hates TEs
2) Jerry Angelo makes many bad decisions.

:edit: ...they then combined forces. I'm actually surprised both of them are already gone and that we didn't ride out a couple more years of that wankery.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 10, 2012, 03:03:50 PM
On the opposite side, the Dolphins have been picking a lot of linemen early and basically ignoring the WR position and look where its gotten them.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2012, 03:04:34 PM
The Dolphins are one good wideout (maybe two) from being the playoffs. That team has probably done more with less this year than anybody.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 10, 2012, 03:07:56 PM
That's kind of my point.  Ignoring the WR position probably cost them a playoff spot this year.  And apparently if they address this glaring need early on in the draft next year their GM deserves to be fired.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2012, 03:13:46 PM
We're not saying WR are unimportant, only that they usually aren't worth wasting a first round pick on. Randall Cobb was a 2nd round pick. Jordy Nelson was a second rounder. Greg Jennings was a 2nd rounder. All 3 are solid WR playing behind an elite QB. Boldin was a 2nd rounder. Wes Welker was undrafted. Marques Colston was a 7th rounder. Brandon Marshall was a 4th rounder. You don't have to spend a 1st round pick on wide out to get pro bowl caliber players. You just need to have someone worth a damn throwing them the rock, someone that isn't getting facefucked every third play (or has the escapability to make plays like Rodgers does).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2012, 03:20:35 PM
That's kind of my point.  Ignoring the WR position probably cost them a playoff spot this year.  And apparently if they address this glaring need early on in the draft next year their GM deserves to be fired.  :oh_i_see:

They drafted Ted Ginn in the first round of 2007. It was dumb. Behind him in that draft went 9 probowlers, including 2 O line guys for the Niners and the Ravens. Also Marshawn Lynch, and Derrelle Revis. Also Dwayne Bowe went in the first round to KC.

They could have had 2 probowler WRs in Steve Smith or Sidney Rice in the 2nd round. They took a shitty QB named John Beck.

My point about WR isn't to ignore them. My point is that for the most part they are wildly overrated as a first round choice.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 10, 2012, 03:52:46 PM
You can find late round gems and first round busts at any position, though.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 10, 2012, 04:10:28 PM
The Dolphins are one good wideout (maybe two) from being the playoffs. That team has probably done more with less this year than anybody.

Philbin just might be a better coach than I gave him credit for. He was just so dull on Hard Knocks it was hard to imagine him being inventive and/or inspiring anyone. He must be a hell of a poker player  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on December 10, 2012, 04:28:41 PM
Yeah, he didn't come off too well on that show.  I really enjoyed that peek into a clubhouse.  It was kind of bittersweet. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 10, 2012, 05:12:42 PM
Our current dramaz:

http://blog.sfgate.com/49ers/2012/12/10/brandon-jacobs-suspension-the-right-move-for-the-49ers/

Not too surprising that he's upset, but, you know, if you want to play, play better.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on December 10, 2012, 05:45:16 PM
The Jets and Cowboys are still in the playoff hunt.  Let that sink in for a moment.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 10, 2012, 05:58:26 PM
Well the Cowboys have a winning record so that's not surprising. The Jets are still in it despite a losing record thanks to the anemic AFC West and the fact that Pittsburgh's defense isn't scaring anybody this year. In Peter King's MMQB column there was this amusing set of stats about Sanchez and the Jets:
Quote
he New York Jets have a two-game winning streak, and there's a chance it's the ugliest two-game winning streak in their history. Mark Sanchez's last 40 possessions (over the last three games, dating to Thanksgiving night against the Patriots) have produced, among other results: One touchdown pass. Three touchdown runs. Ten turnovers. Fifteen punts.

Read More: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/peter_king/12/10/Week14/index.html#ixzz2EhjRib8O


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 10, 2012, 06:42:16 PM
Cowboys are getting healthy (well except for Dez) and clicking when they need too.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2012, 07:12:46 PM
What Houston team did I just watch?  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 10, 2012, 07:47:56 PM
It's going to be another Patriots vs. Giants Super Bowl :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2012, 08:50:58 PM
I can't take Houston seriously anymore. OT wins against Jax and Detroit, then you give up 42 again to the Pats after doing it at home against the Packers? They truly are the Atlanta Falcons of the AFC.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on December 10, 2012, 08:56:41 PM
What Houston team did I just watch?  :ye_gods:

Patriots are starting to get scary.  If their defense can lock in like that they are going to be a tough out.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2012, 09:07:31 PM
Schaub's folded like a lawn chair now against the Pack, Bears, and Pats. On the road he's thrown 9 TDs, and 5 picks. FOUR of those TDs came against one team, the Broncos. There's a 20 point gap in his passer rating between the home/road games.

I mean if they have to set foot on anybody else's turf in the post-season, it's over. Meanwhile Rodgers is passing at 111.1 rating on the road...WHAT?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on December 11, 2012, 06:20:51 AM
You are right, one player in a vacumn doesn't make or break a team. My arguement is that in terms of how many plays a WR has to make vs a lineman it's simply ineffecient to draft a WR with a high pick. The only reason the Pats drafted TE's in the first round were because TE's are also useful in the blocking game (though Ben Watson and Daniel GRaham turned out to be mediocre anyway). This is essentially a statistical value premise and statistics only go so far but they sure do make a good starting point.

Then you need WRs who can run routes, HBs who can actually block, QBs who will make throws or get rid of the ball quick instead of tryin to be a hero on every play, coaches who can coach o-line and so forth.

I agree, you build a football team from the foundation up.  The foundation is the O/D line.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on December 11, 2012, 06:21:46 AM
It's going to be another Patriots vs. Giants Super Bowl :why_so_serious:


As a Giants fan, I hope not.  Say the Giants make it, I'd like to see some variety!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on December 11, 2012, 06:22:48 AM
The Dolphins are one good wideout (maybe two) from being the playoffs. That team has probably done more with less this year than anybody.

Hmm not quite yet.  They would have to compete with Bengals, Steelers, (or Ravens, depending who takes the division) and the Colts because they aren't winning the Division as long as Brady is playing.

Not saying it's impossible because anything is possible in the NFL but I wouldn't put money on it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: shiznitz on December 11, 2012, 07:05:00 AM
The Dolphins are one good wideout (maybe two) from being the playoffs. That team has probably done more with less this year than anybody.

One could argue they have a QB issue as well.  McNabb - who was not a great QB - managed to do pretty well with no-name WRs most years.  Maclin and Avant were late round pickups, iirc.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 11, 2012, 07:30:06 AM
No-name does not mean unskilled.

And don't forget.. Dolphins DID have Marshall.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 11, 2012, 07:53:17 AM
What Houston team did I just watch?  :ye_gods:

The one that plays big teams on night games.  :why_so_serious:

That shit was just unwatchable. I turned it off after the Pats got 28 points. Their defense isn't so bad they give up a 3 TD lead in the 3rd quarter. The fact that Houston couldn't fucking run the ball for shit just killed them, along with dropped passes and poor QB play.

As for Brandon Jacobs, he's bitching about playing time and I'm thinking... "WHY DID YOU SIGN WITH THE 49ers?" It isn't like they needed a running back. They had 3 great/decent running backs, none of whom are notorious for shitting the bed or getting injured. What the fuck made you think that situation was going to lead to playing time? Surely there was somewhere he could have gone that would have given him a better chance to play. Green Bay would love him about now. Detroit? Anywhere but San Fran.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 11, 2012, 10:37:33 AM
Taglibue Vacates All Player Discipline (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/12/11/tagliabue-vacates-all-player-discipline/)

In short, Tagliabue upholds the evidence, but hangs the blame on the coaching staff.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 11, 2012, 11:17:02 AM
Wow, that's a chickenshit decision if ever there was one. "You did wrong, but you was only following orders!"

Talk about CYA Let's Keep the NFL Out of a Lawsuit thinking.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on December 11, 2012, 11:18:14 AM
What Houston team did I just watch?  :ye_gods:

The one that plays big teams on night games.  :why_so_serious:

That shit was just unwatchable. I turned it off after the Pats got 28 points. Their defense isn't so bad they give up a 3 TD lead in the 3rd quarter. The fact that Houston couldn't fucking run the ball for shit just killed them, along with dropped passes and poor QB play.

As for Brandon Jacobs, he's bitching about playing time and I'm thinking... "WHY DID YOU SIGN WITH THE 49ers?" It isn't like they needed a running back. They had 3 great/decent running backs, none of whom are notorious for shitting the bed or getting injured. What the fuck made you think that situation was going to lead to playing time? Surely there was somewhere he could have gone that would have given him a better chance to play. Green Bay would love him about now. Detroit? Anywhere but San Fran.

If he had stayed in NY he would of gotten more money too.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 11, 2012, 11:23:50 AM
If he had stayed in NY he would of gotten more money too.

Would he of?  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on December 11, 2012, 11:27:58 AM
Why, you don't think he should of?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 11, 2012, 11:30:43 AM
With them drafting David Wilson, no he should not of.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 11, 2012, 12:01:06 PM
I don't think he would have received a raise, but also I don't think Wilson would have been the reason for it. They drafted Wilson almost 2 months after cutting Jacobs, while there was still plenty of talent on the board in other positions NYG could have used if Jacobs was still on the roster.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 11, 2012, 12:02:32 PM
would have

c-c-c-c-c-combo breaker


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 12, 2012, 09:15:00 AM
Here's my crazy take on the rest of the season, via ESPN's Playoff Machine thing: http://tinyurl.com/n8nflw15


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on December 13, 2012, 03:23:34 AM
Pats losing at home to the 49ers?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on December 13, 2012, 04:19:37 AM
Nice little tool.  But yeah, mine comes out a little differently.  Surprised to see that I will have both the Giants and the Redskins in the playoffs, but the big unknown here is what RG3 will be able to do over the next few weeks.  If he can't run...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 13, 2012, 07:10:27 AM
Pats losing at home to the 49ers?

Yup. I think the Niners will get pressure on Brady and force some turnovers. It'll be close, but I feel that the Niners pull it off.

Nice little tool.  But yeah, mine comes out a little differently.  Surprised to see that I will have both the Giants and the Redskins in the playoffs, but the big unknown here is what RG3 will be able to do over the next few weeks.  If he can't run...

The schedule is still pretty easy, and Griffin's a good QB as well, with Garcon coming off VERY strong in the last few weeks. But yes, it is still a huge question mark.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on December 13, 2012, 10:31:27 PM
Griffin as a serious threat to run in that pistol/option formation is what other teams can't deal with.  A slightly gimpy Griffin as a pocket passer?  Yes, he's still pretty good, but the talent around him doesn't hold up quite as well.  I wonder if Morris will be as effective if RG3 isn't acting as a runner and/or a diversion.  Or shit, maybe his knee will be just fine and he'll run like gangbusters.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 14, 2012, 06:48:22 AM
Philly was in that game last night. Then they went butterfingers.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 14, 2012, 07:54:53 AM
Griffin as a serious threat to run in that pistol/option formation is what other teams can't deal with.  A slightly gimpy Griffin as a pocket passer?  Yes, he's still pretty good, but the talent around him doesn't hold up quite as well.  I wonder if Morris will be as effective if RG3 isn't acting as a runner and/or a diversion.  Or shit, maybe his knee will be just fine and he'll run like gangbusters.

RG3 isn't really a diversion for Alfred Morris, as Morris only has 42 receiving yards. The threat with a player like RG3 is the defense having to drop down to contain him and leaving his receivers open.

Morris, in some capacity, could be better with RG3 in there, as long as the passing game stays solid. If the OL can stand up, and removing RG3 as a runner, you could see Morris climb to 150 and 2.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 14, 2012, 08:41:01 AM
It's going to be another Patriots vs. Giants Super Bowl :why_so_serious:


As a Giants fan, I hope not.  Say the Giants make it, I'd like to see some variety!

As a Pats fan, I agree..who wants to see the Giants in the superbowl again anyway?  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on December 14, 2012, 09:32:07 AM
..who wants to see the Giants in the superbowl again anyway?  :grin:

A hell of a lot more people than want to see the Patriots in the SuperBowl.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 14, 2012, 09:55:28 AM
Denver's gonna win the AFC and play in the Super Bowl, don't worry.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 14, 2012, 10:10:01 AM
..who wants to see the Giants in the superbowl again anyway?  :grin:

A hell of a lot more people than want to see the Patriots in the SuperBowl.  :why_so_serious:

But I don't care about those people... :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 14, 2012, 10:12:01 AM
Denver's gonna win the AFC and play in the Super Bowl, don't worry.

Not if the AFC championship game is in Foxboro they won't ...

And could we all agree that the only thing worse than a Giants - Pats superbowl again would be a Manning Bowl? The buildup will be insufferable.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 14, 2012, 10:14:12 AM
Denver's gonna win the AFC and play in the Super Bowl, don't worry.

Not if the AFC championship game is in Foxboro they won't ...

And could we all agree that the only thing worse than a Giants - Pats superbowl again would be a Manning Bowl? The buildup will be insufferable.

But it would be a Super Manning Super Bowl. ELI VS PEYTON IN NEW ORLEANS, WHERE THEY GREW UP.

I can see the endless video package now...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 14, 2012, 11:07:15 AM
Oh god I forgot it was in New Orleans. You know in fact go ahead, give us a Manning bowl, maybe ESPN will implode.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 14, 2012, 11:08:14 AM
Early February is probably the wrong time of year for a hurricane, but maybe global warming will help us out.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 14, 2012, 11:13:50 AM
Early February is probably the wrong time of year for a hurricane, but maybe global warming will help us out.

Tsk. You're a terrible human. I, personally, would say that ANY time of year is the wrong time of year for a hurricane.

Tsk.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 14, 2012, 11:31:35 AM
Hey maybe the falcons will beat the Giants in the playoffs....

..

.


Aww come on it could happen right?


Right?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 14, 2012, 11:56:31 AM
The Falcons and Houston are due to be picked up on fraud charges in January.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2012, 10:10:03 AM
I love a good Eli fuckup in the first drive! Merry Christmas!  :awesome_for_real:

EDIT: 14-0 Falcons...and the Giants are missing FGs to boot. This is a brilliant start.

EDIT2: 24-0! The Giants are making that ice thinner and thinner for their division lead.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 16, 2012, 12:03:26 PM
Am I finally allowed to get excited? The defense is alive.

Also...

(http://i.imgur.com/EXPvR.gif)

And CBS just switched games. Lawl.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2012, 12:41:32 PM
The Falcons are dismantling the Giants. They may get shut out. This is an early Christmas present that keeps on giving!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 16, 2012, 01:26:33 PM
If the Cowboys win it'll be a 3-way tie for first place in the NFC East (not including tie breakers), with 2 games to play after this week :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2012, 01:35:21 PM
First time the Giants have been shut out since 1996. Ahhh, if the Cowboys win this may be one of the best days in December in a long while.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 16, 2012, 02:00:31 PM
Am I finally allowed to get excited? The defense is alive.

Also...

(http://i.imgur.com/EXPvR.gif)
And CBS just switched games. Lawl.
Here's a better look at what's happening there:

(http://sinfl.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/moreno-hurdle2-12-16-12.gif?w=600&h=337)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2012, 02:03:11 PM
I've seen that before when he did it at UGA  :awesome_for_real:

(http://larrybrownsports.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/09/knowshon-moreno-jumps-hurdles-defender.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2012, 04:53:05 PM
OT!  :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on December 16, 2012, 05:37:22 PM
Mike Tomlin needs to go, along with Todd Haley and the rest of the Steeler coaching staff.

Both ends of the game, from acquiring and slotting players to the even more atrocious game management. Well, not totally, as they seem to perform well in the last two minutes of the 1st half. Rest of the game, staff looks unprepared for down & distance situations (last week failing to go for 2 to pull within 16 after running hurryup, then in post-game saying game was already gone -- what? why was your starting QB still out there then?), running stale predictable plays (which most of the league seems afflicted by too now), etc.…

Romo looked good today, but those were 5th and 6th string CBs he was throwing against…

And Troy Polamalu seems to lost his tackling ability…


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2012, 05:59:06 PM
Mike Tomlin needs to go, along with Todd Haley and the rest of the Steeler coaching staff.

I really hope that was a joke. You can't be serious.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 16, 2012, 06:28:15 PM
The Steelers don't change coaches after a bad season.  They've had 3 coaches since 1969.  And Tomlin has the best winning percentage of all of them. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ginaz on December 16, 2012, 07:44:35 PM
The Steelers need an offensive line that will prevent Ben from being getting injured and missing starts.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on December 16, 2012, 07:48:38 PM
So the Patriots are the best team in the NFL, right? :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2012, 07:58:41 PM
Everyone always wants to give the Patriots a pass on their shitty defense until they get exposed and face a balanced team. Unfortunately it's usually in the playoffs before that happens.

SF is probably the most balanced team in the NFC. They will absolutely struggle against any team with a competent secondary and a good run defense. That's why St. Louis gave them fits. The best defense they've faced is the Bears, but they played them when their starting QB was out...

PS - I still think GB and DEN are the best teams in the league.

EDIT: And now SF has decided to go into a shell, and play zone defense on the other end. Um, that's a TERRIBLE IDEA YOU IDIOTS.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on December 16, 2012, 08:25:55 PM
Ugh. Get a first down SF, Jesus.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2012, 08:40:20 PM
Nope. Tied.

Wow SF. Harbaugh and the entire coaching staff for the niners took their foot off the gas. GUESS WHAT FUCKHEADS? YOU CAN'T DO THAT ON THE ROAD.

EDIT: And now NE gets torched again. This game is hilarious.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 16, 2012, 08:53:51 PM
Mike Tomlin needs to go, along with Todd Haley and the rest of the Steeler coaching staff.

You cannot be serious.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 16, 2012, 09:09:55 PM
Pats losing at home to the 49ers?

Yup. I think the Niners will get pressure on Brady and force some turnovers. It'll be close, but I feel that the Niners pull it off.


 :oh_i_see:

Even if I SHOULD have been wrong about it being close.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Surlyboi on December 16, 2012, 09:16:40 PM
Lolpatriots.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2012, 09:18:41 PM
If you give up points in the 40s in the NFL, you should lose.

This puts Denver in the drivers seat for a bye now.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on December 17, 2012, 12:13:08 AM
Someone post a sad Eli picture or .gif for me, I am too lazy to look for one to cheer myself up.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on December 17, 2012, 03:39:53 AM
Pats losing at home to the 49ers?

Yup. I think the Niners will get pressure on Brady and force some turnovers. It'll be close, but I feel that the Niners pull it off.


 :oh_i_see:

Even if I SHOULD have been wrong about it being close.

Hat tip to you sir.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on December 17, 2012, 05:27:36 AM
Ahh thank you football gods. I had to turn the game off when the Patriots got the ball back down 7 because I thought that the lolzone was going to give up a dozen more points.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on December 17, 2012, 06:03:24 AM
Wow did the Ravens just completely back into the playoffs.  No O-line, defense is garbage, and the game is back to being too fast for Flacco.  Just  :ye_gods: 



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on December 17, 2012, 07:24:02 AM
Mike Tomlin needs to go, along with Todd Haley and the rest of the Steeler coaching staff.

You cannot be serious.

Yes I am serious.

They are a bad team -- winning only 2 of last 6, and those 2 were against the awful Kansas City (in OT) and a team in freefall (Baltimore).

Losing I can accept, but worse is the (a) players not able to tackle, which is a Steeler trademark even in bad seasons, (b) continuous inability to block and/or address offensive line woes, and (c) game management which has been simply atrocious and indefensible.

Yeah, Tomlin has a great record since taking over in 2007, but how much of that is due to the talent acquisition and coaching efforts of the previous regime? How many players of significance has Tomlin drafted (besides the receivers who are overrated, drop passes in critical situations and worse cannot hold onto the football or even possess any game time awareness)? The standouts on defense and offense both are slowing, aging and there is no suitable replacement transition happening.

8-8 seasons might be acceptable fare in other NFL cities, but not in Pittsburgh. When Noll had it happen a couple of years, he was gone, despite the 4 SB rings. It nearly happened to Cowher too, and if it wasn't for Roethlisberger (who Cowher did not want, preferring Tommy Maddox) he would have exited before his SB victory in 2005 season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 17, 2012, 08:03:30 AM
It apparently took close to ten 8-8 type seasons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Noll) for them to get rid of Noll.    :oh_i_see:

Even if you want him gone for a mediocre year, it's not going to happen unless he does something completely stupid off the field. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2012, 08:25:19 AM
Someone post a sad Eli picture or .gif for me, I am too lazy to look for one to cheer myself up.

(http://24.media.tumblr.com/5ddfb9f3d829ce2ae9395d8a679d9f8d/tumblr_mf57ahDBor1rfimo0o1_1280.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2012, 09:02:54 AM
Yeah, Tomlin has a great record since taking over in 2007, but how much of that is due to the talent acquisition and coaching efforts of the previous regime? How many players of significance has Tomlin drafted (besides the receivers who are overrated, drop passes in critical situations and worse cannot hold onto the football or even possess any game time awareness)? The standouts on defense and offense both are slowing, aging and there is no suitable replacement transition happening.

Well for starters they drafted Maurkice Pouncey, who is a 2 time pro bowl center in 2 seasons. So...yeah. Your defense is still top 10 in the league in points allowed, and #1 in yards allowed.

The problem is you have a new offensive coordinator who doesn't get it, and got fired from the Chiefs (why you hired this asshole I have no idea). On top of that, you have zero running game. Your playcalling is 60/40 in terms of pass/run. HOWEVER, the production is 78% of your yards through the pass, 28% through the run. You see the problem? It's not Tomlin, it's the asshole you hired who refuses to either abandon the run in favor of a great QB with one of the better passer ratings in the league.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on December 17, 2012, 09:12:42 AM
It apparently took close to ten 8-8 type seasons (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chuck_Noll) for them to get rid of Noll.    :oh_i_see:

Even if you want him gone for a mediocre year, it's not going to happen unless he does something completely stupid off the field. 

86-88 were bad years, yes, but Noll had 4 SB legacy and '87 was a strike year, with the replacement player fiasco. In 1989 Brister & Steelers caught fire at end of season, even upsetting Cleveland (yes, Cleveland once had formidable squad in the modern era) in the playoffs before narrowly losing to Elway Broncos. Followed by 9-7 season where there were some big wins and they actually tied for division lead (losing on tiebreakers). By 1991 and a 7-9 showing it was enough.

OK, Pouncey was a star pick.

Defense yards allowed are meaningless to all but the stat chuckleheads -- look at how the D performs in 4th quarter, or protecting a lead, or getting turnovers. Yards are not created equal -- and situational context much more important than yards yielded. Granted, defense is still slightly better than average, but it's best performers are players in the twilight of their career.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2012, 09:18:21 AM
No. The point is your offense is the problem. Don't look just at the losses. Look at how you got some of your wins. You only scored 16 on the Eagles? The league has done better than that against that shitty Philly squad. You had to go to OT to beat the freaking Chiefs with 16 points. You lost to the Ravens because you could only put up 10. Only 14 against Cleveland.

Buffalo scores better than your offense right now. No, I'm not making that up. If you're relying on the defense to get turnovers just so you can score, that's not a defensive problem.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 17, 2012, 09:23:21 AM
Great EliFace.

So the Steelers. Do not fire Mike Tomlin. But you better get rid of Todd Haley, because like most former Belichek assistants, he is shit without Bland Bill and the Bradinator. How do I know this? Because the Steelers let Bruce Arians go and he's got the 2-14 Colts on the brink of the playoffs with a rookie QB (arguably the best-rated rookie QB in a decade but still... rookie). Haley, meanwhile, with much of the same cast as last year's playoff team can't get them anywhere near the level they were at last year. Addressing the Rapist's health is another thing that needs to happen. I firmly believe the Steelers had a better chance to win that Super Bowl against Green Bay if the Rapist hadn't been battered to shit all year. They cannot afford to lose him. Even when he's been in there, Haley's offensive schemes have not been good. That they might miss the playoffs is LOLWORTHY.

The Ravens, oh boy the Ravens. Apparently it doesn't matter who your OC is, there is just an aversion to giving Ray Rice the rock. I don't understand it. I think he touched the ball 3 times in the first fucking quarter. 15 touches the whole game. They started the game throwing the ball. I don't understand. This is the same shit Cameron was doing. FLACCO CANNOT WIN THE GAME THROWING 40 FUCKING TIMES, at least not against good defenses. He's not a bad QB but they keep putting him in situations that do not play to his strengths. RUN THE FUCKING BALL. Their first few runs were with this Pierce guy and not Ray Rice. What is so fucking hard to understand about this team offensively? Run the ball, wear down the defense, chew up the clock and keep the ball out of Peyton Manning's hands. Their defense though, it's even worse. Everybody on that defense got OLD and BUSTED and now they are running out guys like Kerry Williams who GIVES UP ON PLAYS. Decker is not fast enough to have beat Williams on that long TD if the CB actually stays with the play. Baltimore ought to be fucking embarrassed because they are a better team talent wise than they showed yesterday.

Fuck you, Giants. Since you hold a tiebreaker over the Pack in the playoff race, I hope you lose the division. Also, you assassinated my fantasy playoffs.

I turned the New England/SF game off at 31-24 when the 49ers looked dead set on losing the game by not making a first fucking down. Otherwise, they were fucking dominant and should never have let the Pats back in that game. Kaepernick continues to impress, though. His touch on long passes is pretty goddamn good. Alex Who?

I'm going to go ahead and call it now. Kirk Cousins will be Arizona's starting QB next year. Or somebody's because he isn't going to start in Washington short of RGIII's death or retirement and he's looking like he deserves to start. For all their lack of talent at wideout, their defense is solid and Washington owned them. The offseason is going to be a fun one for trades/free agent QB's because right now I see Matt Flynn, Alex Smith and Kirk Cousins being seriously hot commodities. Arizona, KC, Minnesota, Tennessee, Jacksonville, the Raiders (maybe), Baltimore (maybe), and Philiadelphia (maybe), they are all going to be looking for a starter and there isn't much in the draft to be excited about.

PACKERS WIN THE NORTH. Cutler sacked 4 more times, looks like his neck/shoulder may be hurting more than he's letting on. Minnesota leapfrogs the Bears in the wildcard spot. These are all good things.

Tonight's game will be unwatchable, so I won't watch it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2012, 09:26:32 AM
Hey diddle diddle Ray Rice up the middle.

Unless it matters then it's Flacco manning the failboat.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2012, 09:42:08 AM
Hey diddle diddle Ray Rice up the middle.

Unless it matters then it's Flacco manning the failboat.

Depends on which Manning you get....

That's what you were referring to, right?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on December 17, 2012, 10:10:58 AM
I think the Patriots are still a serious threat and the fact that they got to play the NIners now is great for them if they end up seeing them in the Super Bowl.  Kaepernick is still in that part of his career where there isn't a lot of film on him and he is giving team fits right now because they are giving some strange looks.  We see this with a lot of "dual threat" QBs, but eventually the film gets out there and they remain very good, but not the unstoppable forces they sometimes appear to be at first.  See also: Cam Newton.  If they Patriots play them again in the Super Bowl, which is a real possibility, I think you'll see a better game plan.  The Patriots defense is a real problem, for sure, but I still think they are as likely as anyone from the AFC to make it to the Super Bowl.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 17, 2012, 10:11:56 AM
ok wtf. Gotta love the NFL season.

Continueing my 'I'm still terrified of the Giants' thoughts, I personally think they went out and lost to the Falcons on purpose. All part of some grand plan by coughlin to get their backs to the wall and playing like desperate men going into the playoffs. I will not believe otherwise until I see the Giants actually knocked out of the playoffs.

The Pats? Well um , heh, urr....eek? The apologists here are saying that 'this is actually good for them, will help come playoff time'. God I hope they are right because they played some shit football last night. Defense looked like it had regressed to 2009, turnovers galore, shitty special teams. blargh.
Holy fuck Colin Kapernick....how is this a team that can't even beat the St. Loius. Rams.
wtf wtf wtf.

Maybe that Denver / GB thing will come true. fuck.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 17, 2012, 10:14:55 AM
Oh and New England in Denver for the second round of the playoffs.(yes the colts might beat the Ravens) ...Don't like our chances.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on December 17, 2012, 10:20:52 AM
Adrian Peterson. Coming back from the knee thing is one thing... to threaten the single season rushing record in the same season? That guy is a god damn cyborg.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2012, 10:34:38 AM
Oh and New England in Denver for the second round of the playoffs.(yes the colts might beat the Ravens) ...Don't like our chances.

And this time Denver will HOST the event. :D


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 17, 2012, 10:46:45 AM
The one fucking time since the Steve Grogan days that I root for the Pats and they shit all over themselves. Fuck Emperor Belichick, and fuck Uggs Boy. Cunts.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 17, 2012, 11:10:24 AM
The problem is you have a new offensive coordinator who doesn't get it, and got fired from the Chiefs (why you hired this asshole I have no idea).
There are plenty of head coaching busts* who are excellent as coordinators (Josh McDaniels**, Wade Phillips, Mike Nolan, etc.) and Haley had a good run as offensive coordinator at the Cardinals so it's not surprising the Steelers picked him to replace Bruce Arians.

* though compared to Crennel, Haley's time would be consider the "glory years" having won the AFC West in 2010, and the real problem in KC is Scott Pioli

** who is likely to get another shot at a head coaching job given the league leading offense at NE currently


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2012, 11:43:15 AM
I'd love to see McDaniel get another shot, if only for the comedy. The only thing that makes that offense work is Brady.

NE under McDaniels #1 in scoring
NE under Bill O'Brien #3 in scoring
Hell in 2009 I don't even think they HAD an offensive coordinator and they were #6 in the league in scoring. If that's not an indictor, I don't know what is.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 17, 2012, 11:54:19 AM
They've taken it to another level, though, this year with their "one word" no-huddle offense that they "borrowed" from Chip Kelly (actually he consulted with them on it). They started using it last season (under O'Brien) but they weren't very good at it back then (needed more practice with it). A coach that can teach that to a team is going to be in demand.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 17, 2012, 01:56:19 PM
Ask Sam Bradford how good a fucking OC Josh McDaniels is. That motherfucker almost ended Bradford's fucking career. He's as bad as goddamn Mike Martz. He can get a shitload of offense out of decent talent, but the QB is going to get his shit pushed in doing it.

Also, TEBOW.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2012, 02:02:32 PM
I don't buy Chip Kelly's hurry up nonsense in the NFL. I barely buy in college when you face a team that plays defense at all.

But people love big numbers, so the hype train rolls on.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 17, 2012, 02:12:15 PM
I'm going to go ahead and call it now. Kirk Cousins will be Arizona's starting QB next year. Or somebody's because he isn't going to start in Washington short of RGIII's death or retirement and he's looking like he deserves to start. For all their lack of talent at wideout, their defense is solid and Washington owned them. The offseason is going to be a fun one for trades/free agent QB's because right now I see Matt Flynn, Alex Smith and Kirk Cousins being seriously hot commodities. Arizona, KC, Minnesota, Tennessee, Jacksonville, the Raiders (maybe), Baltimore (maybe), and Philiadelphia (maybe), they are all going to be looking for a starter and there isn't much in the draft to be excited about.

I actually wonder about the Cousins thing. It could be really profitable for WAS to trade him to one of those teams, but it would be smart to keep him at least for another year and see how RG3 is next year as he and Morris are in 2013. If there is a decline in either of them, it could be problematic, or if RG3 keeps running how he has been and gets hurt again that could also be an issue.

Quote
PACKERS WIN THE NORTH. Cutler sacked 4 more times, looks like his neck/shoulder may be hurting more than he's letting on. Minnesota leapfrogs the Bears in the wildcard spot. These are all good things.

I'm happy for Petersonn, I am, and hope he does finish the last two games like he did on Sunday and breaks the record. Regarding GB winning the North, Minn taking over the wild card, and Cutler......EAD :cry2: :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 17, 2012, 02:14:02 PM
There was some noise going around about McDaniels landing in Chi today.....I found that funny given our QB and WR1 with their history with McD.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2012, 02:22:27 PM
Oh please be true. That would be a trainwreck.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 17, 2012, 02:33:33 PM
No no, we're at capacity on train wrecks from what I can tell. This is based on how many times I see our offensive line laying dead in front of Cutler as he is getting ran over


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2012, 03:57:46 PM
No no, we're at capacity on train wrecks from what I can tell. This is based on how many times I see our offensive line laying dead in front of Cutler as he is getting ran over

Speaking as the qualified fan here... you do not want McDaniels in Chicago. That is a train wreck you haven't seen yet.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 17, 2012, 04:02:11 PM
Yeah, I have no desires for him to be in Chi. I don't think it would happen and found this rumor to be funny.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2012, 04:09:56 PM
Yeah, I have no desires for him to be in Chi. I don't think it would happen and found this rumor to be funny.

There's nothing funny about it. FEAR.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2012, 06:24:56 PM
I mostly believe there are no unwatchable matchups in the NFL. That one team would at least have a star, or a highlight creator, or a great facet of the game where they really performed well.

This Titans v. Jets game made me question that. Then Chris Johnson showed up.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on December 17, 2012, 06:38:28 PM
Don't forget watching Failbow.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2012, 07:08:12 PM
Tebow doesn't fail. He merely struggles valiantly against the odds.   :why_so_serious:

EDIT: And one of my friends has the text of the night to me about the shitty Sanchize: YOU GET A PICK, AND YOU GET A PICK, EVERYONE GETS A PICK! IT'S MARKY'S FAVORITE THINGS!

EDITx2: Ugliest game I've seen all year. No doubt about it. So bad that Tirico couldn't stop calling it an ugly game. Sanchez turns it over 4 times. The Jets will implode after this. Out of playoffs. Out of contention. Embarrassing on all offensive facets.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 17, 2012, 08:39:43 PM
Mike Tirico.   :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2012, 08:47:29 PM
Actually Sanchez turned it over 5 times if you count the dropped snap at the end when they STILL had a shot. LULZ!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on December 17, 2012, 08:52:43 PM
Yeah, it was Tirico's call on that fumble that got my  :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2012, 08:57:01 PM
My favorite quote of the night was when Gruden said, "All we have is one highlight for the first half? Wow, I guess that means we really need to break it down and do our job!"


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on December 17, 2012, 09:02:25 PM
Football does not get worse than that. 

On the bright side, it was a bit funny to watch.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on December 17, 2012, 09:03:36 PM
That ending literally had me laughing out loud.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2012, 09:29:08 PM
That ending literally had me laughing out loud.

Okay, I missed the end of the game, but I've heard something hilarious happened... so.. what?

Edit: Found it.

Jesus.

(http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1890689/ohsnap.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on December 17, 2012, 09:40:52 PM
Needs more Yakkity Sax.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on December 17, 2012, 09:51:02 PM
Also, hardcore pigeon (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=hnOiqQ_f6bs).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 17, 2012, 09:58:04 PM
Football does not get worse than that. 

Sounds like you missed Cal-Washington this year.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ginaz on December 18, 2012, 03:45:33 AM
Football does not get worse than that. 

Sounds like you missed Cal-Washington this year.  :why_so_serious:

NFL football?  And that really was a God awful game.  I thought the Jests couldn't do any worse than the "game" they played against Arizona.  The this happened.  What a perfect way to end your season, too.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on December 18, 2012, 05:42:39 AM
It was just all the better because I was thinking, "After that terrible punt, as shitty as they've played, they might actually do this" and then THAT happened.  It was just so perfect.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 18, 2012, 08:11:37 AM
No no, we're at capacity on train wrecks from what I can tell. This is based on how many times I see our offensive line laying dead in front of Cutler as he is getting ran over

Speaking as the qualified fan here... you do not want McDaniels in Chicago. That is a train wreck you haven't seen yet.

Could the Chicago front office be liable for manslaughter charges once McDaniels blocking schemes get Cutler LITERALLY KILLED? I don't care how many passes Cutler completed to Marshall, with the Bears O line as bad as it is now, McDaniels would make it insanely bad. Might score a few more TD's before Cutler gets hauled off as a torso with his limbs in bags next to him.

As a Packers' fan, I wholeheartedly endorse this move.  :why_so_serious:

Mark Sanchez... oh Mark Sanchez. 4 INT's, 1 TD, 13/28 and 4.7 yards per pass. Is there really any doubt now that this guy cannot hack it in the NFL or at least not on this team? I love that they brought Tebow out for a series (of failure) and then Sanchez stinks it up even worse. How did anybody on the Jets' front office and coaching staff NOT SEE THIS COMING? How did they even win 6 games? And as bad as they were, how did the Titans only beat them 14-10 with the Jets giving away FIVE FUCKING TURNOVERS? Could the Titans be in the market for a QB next year too?

At least now we don't have to worry about the Jets making the playoffs.

EDIT: And I get great pleasure in knowing that while Sanchez flubbed the snap, Greene kicked it forever out of his grasp.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on December 18, 2012, 08:50:57 AM
That ending literally had me laughing out loud.

Okay, I missed the end of the game, but I've heard something hilarious happened... so.. what?

Edit: Found it.

Jesus.

(http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/1890689/ohsnap.gif)

O, what a hilarious game. Had I not went out to the local pub with some others (main attraction being pizza / wings / salad buffet), would have missed this royal comedy.  Jets kept giving it away yet Titans could never seal the deal. On and on until the last embarrassing play here. :D


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 18, 2012, 09:11:28 AM
To be just a little fair to Mark, that was a super shitty snap.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 18, 2012, 09:56:34 AM
Could the Titans be in the market for a QB next year too?

They absolutely SHOULD be. I don't think they can get one though. The only real choices coming out are Tyler Wilson and Matt Barkley. Go ahead and take a USC QB, Titans. I'm sure it will work out.  :awesome_for_real:



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bungee on December 18, 2012, 11:06:58 AM
To be just a little fair to Mark, that was a super shitty snap.   :awesome_for_real:

It's just his body control. Or lack thereof. I get that the procedure of receiving a snap is somewhat automated. And that QBs generally aren't the greatest athletes on the field. But c'mon man...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 18, 2012, 11:07:34 AM
Could the Titans be in the market for a QB next year too?

They absolutely SHOULD be. I don't think they can get one though. The only real choices coming out are Tyler Wilson and Matt Barkley. Go ahead and take a USC QB, Titans. I'm sure it will work out.  :awesome_for_real:

After Locker, I'd be more inclined to think they'd go for a Matt Flynn or Alex Smith before they draft another QB in the first round, especially with this year's class being so uninspiring.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 18, 2012, 11:16:40 AM
On Thursday the 27th, if yall are really bored, take a look at the Military Bowl and watch David Fales out of San Jose State. He's one of those QB kids who I think could be on an NFL roster in a couple years. In his first starting season he's gone for almost 3800 yards, 72% completion, 31 TDs, 9 picks, and came within 3 points of taking Stanford to OT.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 18, 2012, 01:40:25 PM
The Inevitable has been confirmed. McElroy will start versus Chargers. (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/251734/jets-confirm-mcelroy-as-starter-vs-chargers)

Enjoy the CFL, Tebow.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on December 18, 2012, 02:03:23 PM
What is he going to do in the CFL? That's an even bigger passing league.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 18, 2012, 02:09:17 PM
What is he going to do in the CFL? That's an even bigger passing league.

I didn't say succeed did I?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on December 18, 2012, 02:28:01 PM
Then how is he going to Enjoy it!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 18, 2012, 02:29:20 PM
Then how is he going to Enjoy it!

Everyone is nicer there.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 18, 2012, 02:34:18 PM
Wow, they obviously don't want to sell tickets to those games. Putting Tebow in to start would at least sell out the crappy meangingless Chargers game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on December 18, 2012, 02:37:59 PM
When was the last time the Jets made a good decision, in any fashion?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 18, 2012, 02:47:50 PM
When was the last time the Jets made a good decision, in any fashion?

Signing Curtis Martin as a restricted FA in 1998.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 18, 2012, 02:49:40 PM
Ironically that was not the last time Curtis Martin made a good decision.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 19, 2012, 07:15:04 AM
Dan Patrick made a good point about not playing Tebow. The Jets are terrified that if he plays well, the fans will want to keep him instead of dumping their roster. The situation is so crazy it's beyond stupid. They are afraid Tebow will succeed because it would validate their stupidity.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 19, 2012, 07:48:12 AM
That makes perfect sense, and is exactly the kind of shit I was talking about when I ridiculed the trade way back when. You can't play Tebow. The coaches obviously don't trust him to win games, because if they did, they would have started him against the Titans and not Sancheeze, or they would have gone to him after the 2nd or 3rd pick. If you play him now when the games don't mean shit and he WINS, you can't cut him or the fanbase will revolt and even if he wins, the likelihood of any team trading any value for him in the offseason is goddamn nil. There is no Tebow market. Anybody that wants him knows he'll probably be available for league fucking minimum next year and really the only team I can see wanting him is Jacksonville and that's a stretch. It's insane, and just highlights how fucking stupid the trade to get him was in the first place. He's not the reason they lost this year, but that trade is certainly the reason this team has been such a trainwreck this year.

So I put the Jets in the market for a QB next year and not a veteran. This has got to be one of the places I expect to make moves for Flynn or Cousins. I don't think they'll be in on Alex Smith though. The fans won't want him. I think Smith may have a market almost as bad as Tebow. Frankly, Seattle and Washington are going to have guys banging down their door for those two and if they are smart, they trade for draft picks, grab one of this year's draft QB's as a development pick and stock the fuck up in areas of need.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 19, 2012, 07:53:54 AM
There was BARELY a market for him before. Broncos got a 4th and a 6th for him.... and all the Tebowners were clamoring for a 2nd or higher.

He'll be cut. Everyone knows that it's over for him there, so there's no reason to rush out and offer a trade. Just wait for him to be cut.

Manish Mehta reporting that Tebow will demand a trade (https://twitter.com/MMehtaNYDN/status/281408304452890624)

amazing.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 19, 2012, 08:17:13 AM
The only market left for him now is Jacksonville. It's a 2-12 club with absolutely nothing. They can't give the tickets away. They have the QB contest between Blaine Gabbert and Chad Henne, two guys that can't even post a passer rating in the 80s. They lost to the Dolphins 24-3. They lost to Buffalo. Buffalo's won 2 games since the bye: JAX and MIA.

I went on Stub hub to see what tickets are like for the JAX game for the Patriots. It's not some scrub team coming in. It's the Patriots. You can sit in section 232 on the 10 yard line for $36. Those tickets in New England for the crappy Miami game? $209.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on December 19, 2012, 08:28:08 AM
I am a wait and see with the Jets with McElroy at the helm. I suspect he is better than serviceable and the only reason he was #2 was because the Jets did the Tebow and had to justify it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 19, 2012, 09:35:35 AM
Not only would Tebow be great on the Jags for selling tickets, he'd also be great as MJD's fullback and lead blocker. They seem to need a few more sturdy bodies in the backfield too :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 19, 2012, 11:46:13 AM
I really don't think Alex Smith will have a lot of trouble finding a job. He's not going to get a 6 year contract or anything, but he'll do fine. There are a shitload of teams where he'd be an upgrade.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 19, 2012, 11:50:53 AM
I really don't think Alex Smith will have a lot of trouble finding a job. He's not going to get a 6 year contract or anything, but he'll do fine. There are a shitload of teams where he'd be an upgrade.

Like the Jets!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 19, 2012, 12:45:56 PM
The traditional ex-49er QB destination would be the Chiefs, of course.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 19, 2012, 01:02:57 PM
Smith has been progressively improving on his efficiency. A lot of that is because the system is designed to protect him. In 2011, Smith was 20th in passing attempts 17th in yards per attempt. A lot of what he's been coached to do is protect the ball and make necessary checkdowns. The result is that he had the fewest picks of any QB in the league.

That's an outstanding asset on a team with a great defense. Protect the ball, wear down the other team, and win games. However, the moment you have a better option for a down the field gamechanging QB, the team should take it. Smith would be a terrible fit for any of the teams that might need QBs right now, with the singular exception of the Jets. And it would only work on the Jets if they would stop with the fucking mind games and fire Rex Ryan. That clubhouse is completely dysfunctional.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 19, 2012, 01:23:26 PM
Alex Smith would be terrible for the Jets because that offense has no one to throw to AND doesn't know what the fuck it wants to be. It's running game is inconsistent at best and when they've tried to air it out either no one is open or Sanchez misses everyone but the other team.

He'll get a job as a backup. I doubt very seriously Smith is going to get a job as a starter unless he's the last choice left. He'll want more money than owners are wiling to pay and very few fanbases are going to want him over the other potential options.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 19, 2012, 01:56:43 PM
The Jets would need new leadership, but I don't think they have terrible receivers. They just don't have an offensive minded coaching staff at all.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on December 19, 2012, 06:41:54 PM
I think Shahid Khan is jockeying the Jags for a move to L.A. in a couple years and actually wants the team to tank so he can sell it to the league as "we have an old stadium that no one comes to yadda yadda".



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 19, 2012, 07:15:31 PM
LA needs a team. It sucks having no Big Rival.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 19, 2012, 07:52:17 PM
Harbaugh vs. Carroll is the new rivalry :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on December 19, 2012, 08:06:39 PM
Let My Tebow Go (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/16/magazine/let-my-tebow-go.html?pagewanted=2&_r=1&smid=tw-share)

Quote
Last year, he took a team that was 1-4 to the A.F.C. West title and its first playoff game in seven years — and now he doesn’t even play. How is that possible? What’s more, even his ardent supporters admit he’s physically incompetent at the very position he’s supposed to be playing — his throwing motion is awkward, his passes are wobbly — yet, they argue, he seems to possess some higher talent, the oft-cited but ephemeral “intangibles.”

Tebow asks a profound question of his sport: Can a football player be different from his results? Evaluations of performance — beyond the stark statistic of victories over losses — can be notoriously poor, particularly for quarterbacks. After all, Tom Brady wasn’t picked until the sixth round of the draft. The commentariat’s description of Tebow’s “intangibles” are just another way of saying, “I have no idea what’s going on.” Can a quarterback with a 7-4 record be considered a bad quarterback? Was Tebow winning last season because he was somehow good in a way that nobody could explain? And if he wasn’t any good, why was he winning? According to Livy, the great Roman general Fabius said that results are the teachers of fools. But what teachers, other than results, do we have in football? Or in life?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 19, 2012, 08:31:41 PM
General Fabius would probably look at the 45-10 asskicking that Tom Brady put on him in the playoffs and said, "I'm going with the guy in the Uggs married to the panty model."

I guess they always forget that result.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 19, 2012, 09:43:50 PM
FUUUUUUUU. Tebow did not carry the fucking Broncos.

(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on December 20, 2012, 02:38:35 AM
With the ease the Niners threw Smith under the bus...is he a cancer on the team or what? 

As for Tebow, they brought him in to run the Wildcat.  So why didn't he?  The Jets make no gotdamn sense.

And the Titans tossing Locker?  Huh?  Already?  I thought this was the start of the Locker Era, not the end. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on December 20, 2012, 05:48:13 AM
If the Jets were to acquire Alex Smith, I would see it in the same vein as when they splashed a lot of dough to pick up Neil O'Donnel back in the 90s -- a QB that could do OK in a tailored system and make good throws, not make mistakes, backed up by a great D. But I don't believe that model works in the NFL anymore -- your QB needs to make plays and you need a Brady, Brees, Roethlisberger, Rodgers, etc.… …it's been 10+ years since we saw a team ride a mediocre QB to SB glory (TB in 2002?, Baltimore in 2000…). But those teams were blessed with coach/OC a bit more inventive/imaginative on offensive play calling than Rex Ryan…

…that said, from watching the Jets this year, it seems Rex Ryan main goal is to get fired.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on December 20, 2012, 05:50:01 AM


…that said, from watching the Jets this year, it seems Rex Ryan main goal is to get fired.

He is better off as a Defensive Coordinator anyway. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 20, 2012, 08:53:31 AM
FUUUUUUUU. Tebow did not carry the fucking Broncos.

This. If anything, that defense carried the shit out of them until Tebow woke up in the fourth quarters of most of those games. I mean, did they beat ANYBODY by more than 10 points last year?

Tebow had some crazy comebacks/drives and shit, but his record is more an indicator of how good his defense played for 4 quarters than how he played for 1.

Also, the Wildcat. I keep hearing that he was brought in to run the wildcat but there really hasn't been any indication that was the case. What little Tebow running/wildcat style plays they called all season combined would barely be enough to be called a good drive in one game. The truth is no one knows why the fuck Tebow was brought in, least of all the guys responsible for bringing him in. And Rex Ryan is a massive douche who needs to be somebody's DC where he can't ever touch an offense.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 20, 2012, 09:03:39 AM
Tebow was brought in because the owner wanted him, he wanted to win the press coverage battle with the Giants, and he wanted the extra ticket sales.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on December 20, 2012, 09:42:18 AM
Start the Michael Vick to the Jets rumors (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/12/20/start-the-michael-vick-to-the-jets-rumors/)

Quote
According to a report from Manish Mehta of the New York Daily News, Vick would be “amenable” to coming to the Jets if Sanchez isn’t in the equation. On the Jets’ side, coach Rex Ryan is said to have an “affinity” for Vick and Mehta spoke to a Jets source who was all in favor of Vick coming to New York.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 20, 2012, 09:50:37 AM
Vick to the Jets. That would be a colossal clusterfuck, especially if Rex Ryan was still coach. Yeah, let's replace the non-mobile QB with accuracy issues who is a turnover machine with a MOBILE Qb with accuracy issues that is also a turnover machine.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 20, 2012, 09:54:30 AM
With the ease the Niners threw Smith under the bus...is he a cancer on the team or what? 
Doesn't seem like it. Some of the players like Vernon Davis are vocal supporters of him. He seems like a standup guy, too. Rarely complaining about things even during the "dark days" pre-Harbaugh.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 20, 2012, 10:15:26 AM
Vick to the Jets. That would be a colossal clusterfuck, especially if Rex Ryan was still coach. Yeah, let's replace the non-mobile QB with accuracy issues who is a turnover machine with a MOBILE Qb with accuracy issues that is also a turnover machine.


At least there won't be a controversy as to who is the starter in a given week when the new NYJ QB is out on injury....likely for more rib issues


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 20, 2012, 10:17:21 AM
With the ease the Niners threw Smith under the bus...is he a cancer on the team or what? 
Doesn't seem like it. Some of the players like Vernon Davis are vocal supporters of him. He seems like a standup guy, too. Rarely complaining about things even during the "dark days" pre-Harbaugh.


This. It is just a case of him getting beat for the job. Quite likely, imo, that he'll land elsewhere with the QB draft prospects being so shitty


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on December 20, 2012, 03:06:24 PM
I read a very
FUUUUUUUU. Tebow did not carry the fucking Broncos.

This. If anything, that defense carried the shit out of them until Tebow woke up in the fourth quarters of most of those games. I mean, did they beat ANYBODY by more than 10 points last year?

Tebow had some crazy comebacks/drives and shit, but his record is more an indicator of how good his defense played for 4 quarters than how he played for 1.

Also, the Wildcat. I keep hearing that he was brought in to run the wildcat but there really hasn't been any indication that was the case. What little Tebow running/wildcat style plays they called all season combined would barely be enough to be called a good drive in one game. The truth is no one knows why the fuck Tebow was brought in, least of all the guys responsible for bringing him in. And Rex Ryan is a massive douche who needs to be somebody's DC where he can't ever touch an offense.

I read a very recent Rex Ryan interview where he said they brought Tebow in to run the Wildcat.  Didn't they also hire a Dolphins coach that installed the Wildcat? Sparano?  Why they didn't use it much is the least of all mysteries surrounding the Jets this year.

As for bringing in Vick, that's going from the frying pan into the fire.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 20, 2012, 03:13:32 PM
Fuck, at this point they might as well start Tebow.  I don't think it would be possible for him to be worse than Sanchez has been, and it would provide the side benefit of driving the nail in Tebow's media circus coffin as well.  It's a win-win.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on December 20, 2012, 03:21:15 PM
Would it?  Wouldn't Tebow crashing and burning bring down his trade value?  Maybe there's some stupid-ass owner (Hi Mr. Ford!) that thinks the Jets are 'ignoring his amazing potential'?



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 20, 2012, 03:35:10 PM
Trade value?

What trade value.

There was almost no interest in him when he was leaving the Broncos. Broncos got a 4th and a 6th...

He has no trade value or market NOW.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 20, 2012, 04:25:09 PM
Maybe they could get Matt Leinart for him?   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 20, 2012, 04:58:16 PM
If anything, hiding him helps his trade value. It's like the old adage from Mark Twain. Better to keep your mouth closed and let them think you a fool, than open it and remove all doubt.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on December 20, 2012, 10:27:49 PM
The reason Vick has been such a disaster recently, I'm convinced, is because of this insane notion that he should somehow become a true pocket passer.  I understand the guy takes nasty hits, but his real value as a QB has always every been because he is an ultra-quick runner.  When he took over for McNabb, he killed everyone by running the shit out of them.  And because they were so afraid of him running, he could occasionally long bomb the shit out of them with his rocket launcher of an arm.  After taking too many hits, everyone decided he needed to stop running and start learning to camp out in the pocket.  He is not, and never will be a great pocket QB.  Average at best, with a serious tendency to turn the ball over.  Any team that takes him needs a solid 2nd string QB, because you have to let him run and take the risk.  He was dangerous for the same reasons that RG3 is dangerous (though RG3 appears to be better in the pocket, but I think we need more info to draw a conclusion on that).

Start Tebow.  If he fails, then so what?  You are already failing.  If he succeeds?  Well, then you have just proven without a doubt that there is a God, because how else could that fucking happen twice?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 21, 2012, 07:20:26 AM
I think the idea with Vick was that he could improve as a pocket passer over time.  He hasn't.  If anything, he's regressed.  I think it's because they tried to do it in sudden fashion.  That's the sort of thing that could take years for a guy like him.  The dog thing really screwed his career.  He might have picked some of this up by now if he hadn't been in prison.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 21, 2012, 08:17:04 AM
His best two years were AFTER the "dog thing" (http://www.nfl.com/player/michaelvick/2504531/profile)

I'm not sure the problem lies only with Vick for the Eagles. They've been battling with an O-Line that is playing much worse than it did last year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 21, 2012, 08:31:01 AM
Vick's biggest problem with the Eagles was that they WANTED to make him a pocket passer, true... but they didn't have an offensive line that could create a pocket with a needle, some thread and a goddamn pattern. So Vick tries to stay in the pocket to pass but then he has to run for his life but he's been told to pass before running so his feet want to run, his hands want to throw and then BAM, he gets slammed to the ground. AGAIN. And coughs up the ball. Or throws a pick.

They tried to do a lot with him, and they were going to get turnovers no matter how well he did. Not having an O line to protect him though is really what's killed him both physically and statistically. You can't pocket pass without protection unless you are Aaron Rodgers and even he has trouble sometimes.

Also Desean Jackson is an overrated, over-ego'ed piece of shit who quits on his team when he doesn't get paid, then quits on them when he does.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 21, 2012, 09:18:54 AM
To be an accomplished pocket QB, you have to be able to make adjustments at the line and read defenses. Vick has proven that he isn't the brightest bulb on the tree. You do the math.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on December 21, 2012, 08:12:36 PM
Also Desean Jackson is an overrated, over-ego'ed piece of shit who quits on his team when he doesn't get paid, then quits on them when he does.

Perfect for the Eagles. <3

Because fuck the Eagles.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 22, 2012, 06:15:29 AM
His best two years were AFTER the "dog thing" (http://www.nfl.com/player/michaelvick/2504531/profile)

I'm not sure the problem lies only with Vick for the Eagles. They've been battling with an O-Line that is playing much worse than it did last year.

Yes, but he had two years lost in which he could have been developing himself as more of an NFL passer.  And the best two years he's had (which occurred after the dog incident) were years in which he was asked to do much of what he was doing earlier in his career, much of it from busted plays where he was just trying to make something happen. 

I still say he'd be a completely different player today if he hadn't been such an idiotic asshole at heart. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 23, 2012, 06:39:12 PM
Bengals win with 14 total rushing yards.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 23, 2012, 08:52:45 PM
Nice job Seahawks. That was convincing.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on December 23, 2012, 09:22:24 PM
Suck it Harbaugh you bitch.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 24, 2012, 06:28:44 AM
Russel Wilson is ridiculous.  Nobody can catch him.  While I don't think it's necessarily probable because the playoffs are a whole different beast than the last 3-4 weeks of the season, the Seahawks appear to be playing well enough to take home the Superbowl. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on December 24, 2012, 06:41:47 AM
But Pete Carroll is a coaching cancer and the Seachickens are going to be terroble, right?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 24, 2012, 06:42:55 AM
That was my initial thought, yeah.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 24, 2012, 06:44:50 AM
I like Seattle's play, but the moment they put their feet on foreign soil, the playoffs will end for them.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ozzu on December 24, 2012, 08:55:52 AM
I like Seattle's play, but the moment they put their feet on foreign soil, the playoffs will end for them.

That'll be in the first round where they'll more than likely face the Redskins or Cowboys depending on who wins that matchup in week 17.

I'm not sure the Cowboys can beat the Seahawks with all the injuries they have on defense, but I can hope.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on December 24, 2012, 09:20:24 AM
Bengals win with 14 total rushing yards.   :oh_i_see:

And without scoring an offensive touchdown.

Steelers exit in a terrible season -- with recriminations about offensive coordinator and aging players not making plays. Roethlisberger lost his fastball and cannot close anymore, and worse, threw picks that ended the game (and 10 points off Roethlisberger INT). Last week he shifted blame to play calling (which is true) but this week blew up over Mendenhall "trepidation" in short yardage running (http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/story/21446056/roethlisberger-steelers-earn-vacation-with-terrible-output).

Defense played well enough to win but again, most of its top performers are in the twilight of their career and may not be back next season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Surlyboi on December 24, 2012, 11:29:13 AM
I like Seattle's play, but the moment they put their feet on foreign soil, the playoffs will end for them.

That'll be in the first round where they'll more than likely face the Redskins or Cowboys depending on who wins that matchup in week 17.

I'm not sure the Cowboys can beat the Seahawks with all the injuries they have on defense, but I can hope.

The Cowboys won't do shit against the seahawks. The Skins, however could be a really good game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 24, 2012, 03:10:21 PM
I seriously doubt the Cowpokes can beat the Redskins in Washington.  The Redskins have put together a really nice season since they lost those 3 in a row mid season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on December 24, 2012, 06:21:21 PM
I seriously doubt the Cowpokes can beat the Redskins in Washington.  The Redskins have put together a really nice season since they lost those 3 in a row mid season.

Romo is probably having the best year of his career, I think they can take them in Wash.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 24, 2012, 06:55:26 PM
Romo isn't my worry. Which is saying something.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 24, 2012, 08:02:25 PM
Statistically it's probably his third or fourth best year, but I won't argue with you that he's certainly playing well right now.  If it weren't for the 3 or 4 odd games where he completely fucked the pooch I think you'd definitely be looking at his "best" year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sir T on December 26, 2012, 05:18:14 PM
This is probably politics bait but hey (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-12-20/oakland-pays-17-million-for-nfl-raiders-as-cops-get-cut.html)
Quote
Oakland, California, the fifth-most crime ridden city in America, faced a $32 million budget deficit last year. It closed the gap by dismissing a fourth of its police force, more than 200 officers.

Untouched was the $17.3 million that the city pays to stage 10 games a season for the National Football League’s Oakland Raiders and to host Major League Baseball’s Athletics in the O.co Coliseum. The funds cover debt financing and operations and are supplemented by $13.3 million from surrounding Alameda County, based on data compiled by Bloomberg from public records.

...

Oakland mirrors dozens of other U.S. cities and states whose taxpayers provide publicly owned facilities and financial subsidies to teams in the NFL, the most popular U.S. sports league with more than $9 billion in annual revenue. Jacksonville, Florida, also fired police officers and cut services while lowering the Jaguars’ rent 11 times since 1993 and deferring $12.3 million in rent payments.

Taxpayers have committed $18.6 billion since 1992 to subsidies for the NFL’s 32 teams, counting the expense of building stadiums, forgone real estate taxes, land and infrastructure improvements, and interest costs on public bonds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. Eighteen of the teams are owned by billionaires.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Surlyboi on December 26, 2012, 05:29:50 PM
Yeah, it may end up in politics, but jesus, that's dumb.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 26, 2012, 06:27:53 PM
Well, the Raiders and the A's probably do more to decrease crime by keeping people occupied during the games than the police do.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 26, 2012, 07:50:56 PM
The Falcons have been working to cram a new stadium down the throat of our city for the last 2 years. Very few people are actually in favor of it, especially if they try to pull the PSL bullshit, in addition to the hotel/motel tax hike.

Meanwhile you have a Georgia Dome that's hosting every major event possible except a Super Bowl (which is the whole purpose of this, jealousy of New Orleans and Miami)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 26, 2012, 07:57:06 PM
The nice thing about the NFL is where the hell are these teams going to move to?  Buffalo?  London?  Mexico City?  There aren't a lot of options any more, other than LA and nobody seems to be jumping at that one. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on December 27, 2012, 12:55:03 AM
Re:  Cowboys/Skins/Seahawks - I'll preface by saying that this is the NFL, and as we all know, anything can happen.

Cowboys at Redskins should be a good game.  I give the edge to the Redskins because it is in Washington, and because of RG3.  And because, you know, fuck the Cowboys.  When Romo is good, he's real good, and Bryant is also good when he's not committing felonies and stuff, or trying to string together coherent thoughts.  They have a shot at it, but I have a feeling they may wilt.

THAT SAID.  Redskins could give Seattle a good game, simply because I'm not sure that defense would know what to do with RG3.  I would still put my cash on Seattle, but I'd be nervous about it.  Cowboys vs Seattle?  Had this matchup taken place over the last three weeks, Dallas would have been another victim of a 30+ point beatdown.  Seattle now has the clear number one defense, and an offense that has been steamrolling teams of late (now number 8), to put it mildly.  Dallas is middle of the pack in both categories.  And a tendency to fold when the pressure is on.  Yes, anything can happen, but I wouldn't give Dallas much of a chance in that game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 27, 2012, 08:03:48 AM
The nice thing about the NFL is where the hell are these teams going to move to?  Buffalo?  London?  Mexico City?  There aren't a lot of options any more, other than LA and nobody seems to be jumping at that one. 

Well, part of that is that there is no place to play right this second.

LA recently voted to build a stadium next to the staples center that would serve as a stadium as a team as well as bid for the Super Bowl. The teams won't be immediately vocal  about it either, because they still need to sell tickets at their current place. We'll probably hear something in the spring during the owners meetings.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 27, 2012, 11:26:08 AM
The Falcons have been working to cram a new stadium down the throat of our city for the last 2 years. Very few people are actually in favor of it, especially if they try to pull the PSL bullshit, in addition to the hotel/motel tax hike.

Wait... what? Why the fuck would the Falcons need another new stadium? Is the Georgia Dome even 20 years old? That's fucking insane.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 27, 2012, 11:43:59 AM
Yeah, you want to know what's even more insane? THEY WANT TO BUILD IT RIGHT NEXT DOOR AT THE WORLD CONGRESS CENTER.

Nevermind the fact that the biggest bitch ever about Atlanta sports venues are that they are literally right off the I75/85 connector, right above I20. So not only do you have 3 major interstates connecting at a point right in the financial district of downtown, you want to usher in sports traffic there as well on the evenings. Brilliant.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on December 27, 2012, 10:09:28 PM
There's a lot of stigma to not being able to support/host a proper sports team. Doesn't make it right or smart, but I can totally see why a city might favor a team over actual useful things.




Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on December 27, 2012, 11:10:41 PM
Re: Oakland - it's mostly debt financing. They can't default on that without causing themselves much bigger problems. It was a mistake in the first place, but that's obvious now and you'll note that subsequent Bay Area stadiums have been financed mostly privately.

Also, Al Davis. The situation was actually worse before the Raiders came back, I believe, since they didn't have the attendant tax revenues and local business increase, but still had the stadium. The offsetting revenues are hard to pin down with an exact number, of course.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on December 30, 2012, 01:10:17 PM
Enjoy the vacation giants fans!  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on December 30, 2012, 01:19:05 PM
Does that mean the cowboys are in? I don't understand how all the wildcards and stuff work.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on December 30, 2012, 02:28:12 PM
Whoever wins from the redskins and the cowboys gets the 4th seed, should be a massive game tonight.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on December 30, 2012, 02:50:25 PM
And that's it for Andy Reid.  End of an era, but time.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on December 30, 2012, 02:55:21 PM
Whoever wins from the redskins and the cowboys gets the 4th seed, should be a massive game tonight.

Division champs should not automatically get the "4 seed" (even though the seeds mean pretty much fuckall in the NFL). Soapbox off...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on December 30, 2012, 03:07:40 PM
Eli threw for, like, 5 TDs and won and they are still gone.  Should have been more consistent fellas.

Anyone watching the Broncos dismantle the Chiefs?  I know it's the Chiefs, but gotdamn does Denver look invincible. 
The Chiefs have no one in their secondary over 6'.   :ye_gods:

The Falcons slide ass-backwards into the playoffs.  I know they had little to play for today, but it makes Samuel L. Jackson angry.  And you don't want to make Samuel L. Jackson angry.  HE WILL START SHOUTING.

The Lions end the season 4-12.  Dear Calvin Johnson:  I'm so sorry.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on December 30, 2012, 03:08:41 PM
Whoever wins from the redskins and the cowboys gets the 4th seed, should be a massive game tonight.

Oh, sounds exciting!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 30, 2012, 05:55:28 PM
Romo looking pretty good so far.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 30, 2012, 06:11:24 PM
He's still in the Christmas giving spirit.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on December 30, 2012, 08:10:34 PM
 :-o  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on December 30, 2012, 08:22:36 PM
Poor dumb cowboys.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 30, 2012, 08:55:23 PM
Romo taketh and Romo giveth away.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on December 30, 2012, 09:02:58 PM
(http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/18a0iilzk9dn9gif/original.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 30, 2012, 09:04:35 PM
Romo:

Wins-  13 TDs and 3 INTs
Losses-  13 TDs and 13 INTs

I still think it's tough to blame the entire season on him though.  There was plenty of suck all the way around. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 30, 2012, 09:22:30 PM
And injuries.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 30, 2012, 09:35:25 PM
God I love watching Jerry Jones "I'm going to miss the fucking playoffs AGAIN!" face. You can almost see him calculating how many dollars are being wasted on that team.

Romo threw 3 picks and he's just damn lucky that 2 of them didn't result in points. He needs a lot more talent around him than he's got, including an O line. Their defense is a triage unit but they still could have won the game.

The Packers really coughed up a winnable game. I'm ok with it, mainly because it means the Bears miss the playoffs again. But that does mean they'll have to face the 49ers in Frisco once they beat the Vikes at home next week. I don't mind them missing the bye because rhythm offenses like the Packers really need to stay in rhythm to be effective down the stretch. But I would much rather they have to go to the Falcons than the 49ers.

Houston and Baltimore fall ass backwards into the playoffs and lose home field. Both of these teams lost winnable games in bad ways and look weak going into the playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on December 30, 2012, 09:44:53 PM
Dear Houston,

Thank you.

Pats Fans.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on December 30, 2012, 10:53:56 PM
I was feeling glee at watching Jones until they showed that tool Dan Snyder jumping up and down.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 30, 2012, 10:56:00 PM
I was feeling glee at watching Jones until they showed that tool Dan Snyder jumping up and down.

It really is a choice between two rich douchebags. But at least RGIII is fun to watch and seems like a genuinely good kid. Romo is more annoying than anything else and Jones has a history of drafting/signing complete shitbags (Dez Bryant, Terrell Owens). I mean, it's not like the Skins are going to beat Seattle, their defense just isn't that good.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on December 31, 2012, 12:11:53 AM
Enjoy the vacation giants fans!  :awesome_for_real:

You too, buddy!  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 31, 2012, 03:00:43 AM
I was feeling glee at watching Jones until they showed that tool Dan Snyder jumping up and down.
It really is a choice between two rich douchebags. But at least RGIII is fun to watch and seems like a genuinely good kid. Romo is more annoying than anything else and Jones has a history of drafting/signing complete shitbags (Dez Bryant, Terrell Owens). I mean, it's not like the Skins are going to beat Seattle, their defense just isn't that good.
Synder also seems to be content with letting Shanahan run the show* unlike Jones who can't keep himself from meddling with stuff.

* Shanahan has final say, in theory, on all football matters


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on December 31, 2012, 08:28:15 AM
Can't put that on Romo when they couldn't go 6 plays in a row without letting a LB go untouched on a blitz.

Holy shit the Bears fired Lovie? What in the fuck. I'd fuck with the front office but they do not have a coaching problem from where I'm sitting.

*edit* after reading about this more apparently they finally got a better GM last year and probably forced him to work with a coach he didn't hand pick this year so he was looking for an excuse. Bears are fucked and Jay Cutler may end up killing whoever the jackass offensive guru they bring in is.

Reality is they would need to pick up at least one FA lineman and one in the first two rounds of the draft if not two FA's to make that offense not suck donkey balls in 2013.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 31, 2012, 08:52:01 AM
Sucks about AP missing the record by 9 yards. I really wanted him to break that as I haven't seen another RB do so well who isn't making himself look like a total dbag on a regular basis.

Also, it's Coach/GM Housecleaning day!
Lovie Smith out
Tannebaum out
Chan Gailey out
Reid out
Turner out
Shurmur & Heckert out
Pioli unsure currently, likely out
Crennel out
Knapp likely out
Rivera likely out
Smith (Jac) out
Sparano possibly out (persoanlly, I'd give him another season....hopefully one with an actual NFL quarterback playing for the team)




Jones has a history of drafting/signing complete shitbags (Dez Bryant, Terrell Owens).

I actually somewhat like that about Jones, probably because I enjoyed that about his mentor Al Davis as well. I'd simply prefer he put a bit more of a restriction on them to help them grow up. See Dez Bryant and his offical-curfew-that's-not-really-an-official-curfew situation, and his best season yet.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on December 31, 2012, 09:06:27 AM
Sucks about AP missing the record by 9 yards. I really wanted him to break that as I haven't seen another RB do so well who isn't making himself look like a total dbag on a regular basis.

Also, it's Coach/GM Housecleaning day!
Lovie Smith out
Tannebaum out
Chan Gailey out
Reid out
Turner out
Shurmur & Heckert out
Pioli unsure currently, likely out
Crennel out
Knapp likely out
Rivera likely out
Smith (Jac) out
Sparano possibly out (persoanlly, I'd give him another season....hopefully one with an actual NFL quarterback playing for the team)




How many of those guys get picked up as coordinators on other teams next year?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 31, 2012, 09:07:04 AM
Can't put that on Romo when they couldn't go 6 plays in a row without letting a LB go untouched on a blitz.

Holy shit the Bears fired Lovie? What in the fuck. I'd fuck with the front office but they do not have a coaching problem from where I'm sitting.

*edit* after reading about this more apparently they finally got a better GM last year and probably forced him to work with a coach he didn't hand pick this year so he was looking for an excuse. Bears are fucked and Jay Cutler may end up killing whoever the jackass offensive guru they bring in is.

Reality is they would need to pick up at least one FA lineman and one in the first two rounds of the draft if not two FA's to make that offense not suck donkey balls in 2013.

I honestly don't think it's so much Lovie as it is a lack of consistency with offensive coordinators as well as a really, really shitty offensive line. Bringing in Emery was a great move and he did well in the offseason. I honestly would haved liked to have seen one more season with Lovie with a GM who is getting things running smoothly. We'll see who he brings in, maybe he can work some voodoo magic and get Gruden, or spread word of this as there obviously isn't enough Gruden rumors as of this hour :why_so_serious:



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 31, 2012, 09:11:03 AM
Sucks about AP missing the record by 9 yards. I really wanted him to break that as I haven't seen another RB do so well who isn't making himself look like a total dbag on a regular basis.

Also, it's Coach/GM Housecleaning day!
Lovie Smith out
Tannebaum out
Chan Gailey out
Reid out
Turner out
Shurmur & Heckert out
Pioli unsure currently, likely out
Crennel out
Knapp likely out
Rivera likely out
Smith (Jac) out
Sparano possibly out (persoanlly, I'd give him another season....hopefully one with an actual NFL quarterback playing for the team)




How many of those guys get picked up as coordinators on other teams next year?
Lovie will be a head coach, if for some reason he's not than he'll be a D-coord. Rivera, Shurmur, and Crennel will all be coordinators. Reid could go either way, likely a coordinator unless a team gets desparate for a head coach. Turner will hopefully become an O-coordinator. I like him in that position, and he has success there. Head coaching though, I don't know, maybe same chances as Reid. If sparano is released, he'll likely get another coordinator job. Gailey needs to go back to special teams coaching.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 31, 2012, 09:29:21 AM
Andy Reid will get a head coaching job or he likely won't be working. He's had a lot of personal shit to deal with around the death of his son so I wouldn't put it past him to just sit out a year if there isn't a plum position offered. The rest of the fired will probably all wind up as a coordinator of some kind. Rumor is San Diego doesn't want Reid but that would be the perfect fucking place for him.

The Bears firing Lovie I'm ambivalent about. That team was a winner if only they had a goddamn offensive line or blocking schemes that made up for their lack of talent. The fact that Cutler got killed two years in a row under two different OC's with two separate drafts/free agency periods to unfuck the situation is probably a good bit of what got Lovie fired. If that team ever gets a good O line, they will dominate - but only if they de-old that defense because it's starting to resemble the Steelers of a year ago - just on the cusp of an injury-riddled decline. Gruden in Chicago would be pretty scary.

The Jets fired their GM (they should have) but kept Ryan. Yeah, that'll improve the team.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 31, 2012, 10:12:47 AM
The Jets fired their GM (they should have) but kept Ryan. Yeah, that'll improve the team.  :oh_i_see:

For the Jets, they probably will fire Ryan but just not today. I'd be surprised if he stayed one more year, but it could work if they could snag a decent free agent QB and pick up a RB in the draft or a decent free agent. I think they want to see what they could pick up out of the newly available coaches or some of the better prospects from the college level before firing Ryan (who is still a pretty good coach imo even if he has made a lot of dumb moves the last two years).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on December 31, 2012, 10:30:17 AM
Dear Bears,

All I want for Christmas is for you to hire Martz or McDaniels as HC. I have to see Cutler cry some more.

Please? I've been good.

Love and Kisses,

sickrubik.

Edit: OH RIGHT, ALSO. NUMBER ONE SEED. From 2-3 to #1 Seed. Fuck. Yes.

Edit #2

(https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-snc7/418006_10151864310417524_1435294443_n.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on December 31, 2012, 10:37:29 AM
As much as I'd hate to see that happen, it would be funny.....until we have a 6-10 season under either one of them as a result of their asshattery :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 31, 2012, 01:38:43 PM
I was feeling glee at watching Jones until they showed that tool Dan Snyder jumping up and down.
We will fix his hash on Sunday.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on December 31, 2012, 02:02:00 PM
I so want Pete Carroll to crash out of the playoffs and I have to root against the Seahawks because they (and Goddell's Replacement Refs) are basically the reason Green Bay has to play this weekend. However, I can't see Washington beating them, especially with RGIII somewhat hobbled. Washington's defense is not good enough to stop the Seahawks but the Hawks defense IS good enough to contain the Skins. It will be a run-filled slogfest, I'm sure, but at least it's at Washington and not in the Chicken Pen.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 31, 2012, 02:04:28 PM
I totally get rooting against PC (I can't stand the guy). But if that means rooting for Dan Snyder, that is a bridge too far.

And the GB game is completely blown out of proportion. Green Bay could have won the game at any point instead of letting Seattle's garbage pass rush surprise sex Rodgers most of the game. And the call was correct by the rules. There are still pics of the replay with Golden Tate's hands on the ball and his feet on the ground, while the DB is still in the air. Possession, tie goes to offense, fuck off Packers. Of course, I can't defend the godawful PI calls during the drive to the touchdown, but GB got just as many the other way on their TD drive. Not the NFL's finest hour, but certainly nothing to hold against the Seahawks.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on December 31, 2012, 03:29:15 PM
I so want Pete Carroll to crash out of the playoffs and I have to root against the Seahawks because they (and Goddell's Replacement Refs) are basically the reason Green Bay has to play this weekend.
Seattle beat San Francisco the 2nd time. That was enough to give Green Bay the 2nd seed at that time. It's GB's own fault they lost to Adrian Peterson :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 31, 2012, 03:47:43 PM
I think Pete has a team this year.  They are peaking at the right time and have a damned good quarterback.  As good as RGIII and Luck are, Wilson may be even better (much to my surprise). 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on December 31, 2012, 04:03:50 PM
I think Pete has a team this year.  They are peaking at the right time and have a damned good quarterback.  As good as RGIII and Luck are, Wilson may be even better (much to my surprise). 

The fact that both Luck and RGIII are able to be the real deal in the NFL is what should surprise you looking back at QBs who went 1 or 2 in the draft in the last 20 years.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 31, 2012, 05:46:59 PM
Yeah, there's that too.  One of them (at least) should be Ryan Leaf or Akili Smith.

I also think it's fair to say that Wilson certainly did not look like the real deal coming out of college.  He is too short and had too many questionable portions of his game. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on December 31, 2012, 05:52:38 PM
Yeah, there's that too.  One of them (at least) should be Ryan Leaf or Akili Smith.

I also think it's fair to say that Wilson certainly did not look like the real deal coming out of college.  He is too short and had too many questionable portions of his game. 

Oh stop with the too short bullshit... the other part sure.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on December 31, 2012, 05:57:05 PM
There's a reason that teams don't typically draft short QBs.  I'm not the one doing this for a living.  

Here's (http://www.fieldgulls.com/2012/5/3/2995170/seahawks-russell-wilson-a-deep-analysis-of-height-qbs-the-nfl-draft) a pretty decent read on Wilson, if you're interested in reading it.

Addendum-  Huh.  Apparently only 8 NFL quarterbacks under 6 feet tall have thrown a pass since 1970 (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444506004577615422569909752.html). 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 01, 2013, 01:05:15 AM
He isn't short. he's 1" shorter than Drew Brees.

The short talk is all stupid bullshit.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 01, 2013, 01:07:22 AM
You would say that, shorty.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 01, 2013, 01:10:13 AM
You would say that, shorty.

Whatever manhands.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on January 01, 2013, 06:58:02 AM
Norv Turner let go from the Bolts?  I'm...I'm actually surprised.  He's got more lives than a cat.  A worthless, pock-faced loser of a cat.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 01, 2013, 11:03:24 AM
Norv Turner let go from the Bolts?  I'm...I'm actually surprised.  He's got more lives than a cat.  A worthless, pock-faced loser of a cat.

The key there isn't that they got rid of Turner. That was a foregone conclusion and should have happened last year. No, they finally got rid of A.J. Smith in the front office. That shithead has been driving talent off for years as well as drafting brittle players like Ryan Matthews. He was just as much to blame for the Chargers last few seasons as Turner and they'll be better off without him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 04, 2013, 07:46:24 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/QtrGn.jpg) (http://imgur.com/QtrGn)

So it seems that apparently Rex Ryan has a tattoo of his wife, Tebowing, while wearing a Sanchez jersey.

 :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on January 04, 2013, 07:47:08 AM
That is incredible.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 04, 2013, 07:52:35 AM
Forgetting everything else... kudos for Ryan getting into shape.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 04, 2013, 08:00:17 AM
We're through the looking glass on this one.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on January 04, 2013, 08:18:44 AM
A story which never should have been told, has been told. Admittedly, I do find the tattoo funny as hell



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on January 04, 2013, 08:33:42 AM
That HAS to be fake right?


right?  :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 04, 2013, 08:38:11 AM
It is indeed real.

Andy Reid next KC Head Coach. (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/253466/andy-reid-agrees-to-become-chiefs-13th-coach) Nooooooo.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on January 04, 2013, 08:38:44 AM
Why? Could KC be any worse?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on January 04, 2013, 08:39:20 AM
I would wager at least half his compensation will be in barbecue.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 04, 2013, 08:40:29 AM
Why? Could KC be any worse?

As a Broncos fan, I'm not looking forward to having someone like Reid inside the division.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on January 04, 2013, 09:07:57 AM
Yeah, I was glad he didn't go to Arizona for that very reason.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 04, 2013, 09:12:01 AM
I'm still not sure why they fired him in Philly.  He clearly wasn't the problem.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 04, 2013, 09:14:32 AM
I'm still not sure why they fired him in Philly.  He clearly wasn't the problem.

Did you see the press thing? They even said they look forward to putting him in their hall of fame thing, because he's the winningest eagles coach of all time... it was so fucking bizarre.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 04, 2013, 09:17:56 AM
No, I didn't see it.  The guy can obviously coach and the biggest issue there has been personnel decisions.  I don't know how much of that has been his baby, but I'm sure he's not doing it by himself. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 04, 2013, 09:39:43 AM
Somebody had to take the blame for the Eagles sucking so hard and Reid happened to be the guy. It was his decision to trade Kolb and make Vick the starting QB and that has turned into a colossal, turnover-filled disaster. The O Line was fucking pathetic and he was responsible for moving Castillo from an offensive line coach to defensive coordinator, which was another colossal fuckup. It was probably time for him to go somewhere else. Of course, whoever comes in after him will have as big a trainwreck to deal with as there is in the league and I hope some of those really big contracts get cut. Or not, because, fuck the Eagles. They signed the dogkiller.

Rein in KC is interesting. I'd have rather seen him in Arizona where they at least have a defense. KC's got a running game and a pissed off #1 wideout and no fucking QB. Maybe he'll trade for Kolb.  :awesome_for_real: At least KC got rid of that no-talent clown Pioli at GM. What a fuckup.

The Rex Ryan tattoo... that guy is just WEIRD. I mean, creepy old man in a white van hanging around the high school with a can of ether weird. Everytime I think he and his fixation on his wife can't get any weirder, IT FUCKING DOES. Why couldn't the Jets have shitcanned him so he can go back into obscurity as a great DC instead of plastered on the New York newspaper headlines (and thus everywhere else in the world) talking about his wife's fucking feet?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on January 04, 2013, 09:47:58 AM
. Why couldn't the Jets have shitcanned him so he can go back into obscurity as a great DC instead of plastered on the New York newspaper headlines (and thus everywhere else in the world) talking about his wife's fucking feet?

Because the world would be less fun then. Rex Ryan as a HC in NYC is pure gold (outside of Jets fans).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on January 04, 2013, 09:54:00 AM
I don't know why anyone would want the KC job unless it came with buckets more money than you could get anywhere else. 

That being said, it does get really hot here in Arizona and our owner has no desire to win. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 04, 2013, 10:38:34 AM
I'd take the KC job with the caveat of a 5 year contract minimum, a huge buyout, and that they got a new GM. All these things came to pass. It's a good job under those conditions. It's not like the AFC West is fucking gangbusters for the next decade. Peyton won't last that long. And how shitty was Pioli? When will people in the NFL learn that unless you have actual Belichick, the guy that worked with the guy is going to suck ass. Let's review the terrible decisions shall we?

1 - Hired Todd Haley as head coach after firing Herm Edwards
2 - Gave a backup from the Patriots (and a USC QB) a $62M contract for 6 years. He had a 66.7 passer rating in 2012, only playing 9 games.
3 - Gave away Tony Gonzalez to the Atlanta Falcons
4 - Hired Charlie Weiss as an OC, and Romeo Crennel as DC, fired Haley, promoted Crennel, and then fired Weiss and Crennel.
5 - Refusing to Draft decent offensive personnel: Picked Tyson Jackson, a DE from LSU, as the #3 overall pick in 2009. Could have had BJ Raji, Clay Matthews, or Brian Orakpo. Even the Sanchize was available! Took Eric Berry (great pick) in 2010 with the #5 pick. Bear in mind that Cassel had a 69 passer rating at this point, and had no blocking with only Dwayne Bowe to catch. KC scored 18 points a game in 2009, but offense be damned. In 2011, he took Jonny Baldwin a WR with the 26th pick, who subsequently got into a fight in the lockerroom and broke his wrist, thus missing the entire season. In 2012, he took a DT in the first round. KC scored a league worst 13 points a game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on January 04, 2013, 11:16:34 AM
Any word on who might get the Philly job?  I heard Chip Kelly's name mentioned, but it doesn't seem like a good fit to me.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 04, 2013, 12:05:33 PM
It sounds like Cleveland REALLY wants Kelly.

Eagles seem lukewarm on him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 04, 2013, 12:55:02 PM
Kelly in Cleveland would be so very funny.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 04, 2013, 12:57:37 PM
Why? Could KC be any worse?
It would've been if Pioli didn't just get fired. This is what it was like in KC under Pioli:

http://www.kansascity.com/2012/01/14/3371495/arrowhead-anxiety-turnover-off.html


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 04, 2013, 12:59:24 PM
Ah yes, I forgot to mention the Edgar J wiretapping going on under Pioli. Good stuff. I should have put that in the list.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on January 04, 2013, 03:33:59 PM
I don't know why anyone would want the KC job unless it came with buckets more money than you could get anywhere else. 

See the below quote.

I would wager at least half his compensation will be in barbecue.

About the only thing I miss about living KC (esp now when I am hungry) is the BBQ.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 04, 2013, 03:36:35 PM
Ian Rappoport of NFL.com is reporting Browns deal with Kelly just about done.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on January 04, 2013, 03:49:11 PM
Thank Christ. Fuck Oregon.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 04, 2013, 04:16:46 PM
Yesssss.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 04, 2013, 05:20:29 PM
It solves one of Cal's problems. Too bad there's still like, a billion left.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on January 05, 2013, 03:28:49 PM
Ponder inactive tonight wooo!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 05, 2013, 04:34:48 PM
Oh Dalton. AJ Green was wide fucking open.  :heartbreak:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 05, 2013, 09:35:57 PM
Cincy got dominated and yet Houston couldn't really seal the game off. They should have won by like 30-something points but didn't. Their passing game is really not this bad but something just seems off with them. I don't expect them to beat New England next week, as Brady will NOT go down quietly like Dalton.

Once I heard Ponder wasn't going to start tonight, I knew the Pack had it in the bag. Webb is not a bad QB, just inaccurate and inexperienced. Ponder is at least more accurate. Of course, the way they bottled up AP, the Vikes had no chance anyway. If the Packers can beat the 49ers (BIG if), I don't really fear anyone else in this playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on January 06, 2013, 01:47:38 AM
Once I heard Ponder wasn't going to start tonight, I knew the Pack had it in the bag. Webb is not a bad QB, just inaccurate and inexperienced. Ponder is at least more accurate. Of course, the way they bottled up AP, the Vikes had no chance anyway. If the Packers can beat the 49ers (BIG if), I don't really fear anyone else in this playoffs.

You know what, though?  On Minnesota's first offensive drive, they ran that pistol formation and I said to myself "uh oh, they are going to score 45 goddamn points if they keep that up" because Green Bay had no idea what to do with it.  Peterson would have ran for 200 again, and Webb might have got a 100 himself.  And then, inexplicably, they stopped doing it.  I don't remember seeing it for the rest of the game.  Leslie Frazier is a fucking idiot, because that was the only chance they had, and it was working.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 06, 2013, 07:19:29 AM
Minnesota kept giving the Pack first downs on penalties as well. I felt that was the biggest morale killer for them.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 06, 2013, 08:40:02 AM
There's a reason that Leslie Frazier won't be retained past his current contract (and very well may be fired soon). 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on January 06, 2013, 09:16:58 AM
Once I heard Ponder wasn't going to start tonight, I knew the Pack had it in the bag. Webb is not a bad QB, just inaccurate and inexperienced. Ponder is at least more accurate. Of course, the way they bottled up AP, the Vikes had no chance anyway. If the Packers can beat the 49ers (BIG if), I don't really fear anyone else in this playoffs.

You know what, though?  On Minnesota's first offensive drive, they ran that pistol formation and I said to myself "uh oh, they are going to score 45 goddamn points if they keep that up" because Green Bay had no idea what to do with it.  Peterson would have ran for 200 again, and Webb might have got a 100 himself.  And then, inexplicably, they stopped doing it.  I don't remember seeing it for the rest of the game.  Leslie Frazier is a fucking idiot, because that was the only chance they had, and it was working.

So odd that they abandoned it, and odder that they changed even before the Packers introduced any adjustments (thought that Packer D could just pack 8 guys up front and it would nix it, challenge Webb to throw downfield -- although that might have opened up Peterson crack a big run too) but Frazier discarded the only O they had in their playbook repertoire that could possibly work. Even down 2 scores, it seemed they panicked, and should have stuck to their gameplan. Unless that was just an opening gimmick.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 06, 2013, 09:30:48 AM
Yeah, so, Browns not landing Chip Kelly now, and that Kelly will end up with the Eagles or stay in Oregon. (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/253603/mort-browns-moving-on-without-chip-kelly)

However, in REAL news, Doug Marrone signed on to be Bill's next coach. (http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/2267/bills-offense)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 06, 2013, 09:45:37 AM
Let me be the first in saying, who?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on January 06, 2013, 10:42:13 AM
Yeah, so, Browns not landing Chip Kelly now, and that Kelly will end up with the Eagles or stay in Oregon. (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/253603/mort-browns-moving-on-without-chip-kelly)

However, in REAL news, Doug Marrone signed on to be Bill's next coach. (http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/2267/bills-offense)

Browns  - keeping with the tradition.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on January 06, 2013, 10:46:19 AM
I don't think Chip Kelly will leave Oregon this year. I could be wrong though.

I find it amusing that the Bears are looking to the CFL for a head coach though  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 06, 2013, 11:10:55 AM
I'm expecting he will because It looks as though Oregon is going to get the hammer of doom from the NCAA. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ginaz on January 06, 2013, 11:23:18 AM
I don't think Chip Kelly will leave Oregon this year. I could be wrong though.

I find it amusing that the Bears are looking to the CFL for a head coach though  :grin:

Marc Trestman has extensive NFL experience.  He's also been very successful in the CFL.  Would having a coach with lots of experience with professional players not be better than one that has only coached college kids?  Its much easier getting young college players to do what you want rather than millionaire professionals.  I've seen a lot of highly regarded college coaches flop big time in the NHL because they can't handle the transition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Trestman


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on January 06, 2013, 11:31:45 AM
So odd that they abandoned it, and odder that they changed even before the Packers introduced any adjustments (thought that Packer D could just pack 8 guys up front and it would nix it, challenge Webb to throw downfield -- although that might have opened up Peterson crack a big run too) but Frazier discarded the only O they had in their playbook repertoire that could possibly work. Even down 2 scores, it seemed they panicked, and should have stuck to their gameplan. Unless that was just an opening gimmick.

Webb is terrible.  I knew the moment that he stepped on the field that Green Bay would win.  Ponder may not be great, but he's a much more poised pocket passer and that's exactly what AP needs to set up the run. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 06, 2013, 11:32:29 AM
Fuck, Cleveland, you seriously want to look at WHISENHUNT for HC? Really? After the colossal fuckup that was the last two years in Arizona? Sure, he got them to the Super Bowl... or I should say, KURT WARNER got them to the Super Bowl before almost getting killed. Whisenhunt had like 4 or 5 years to get a decent offensive line and the only thing it was offensive to was his QB's health. And THAT'S the guy you like?

Failboat.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 06, 2013, 11:40:33 AM
So odd that they abandoned it, and odder that they changed even before the Packers introduced any adjustments (thought that Packer D could just pack 8 guys up front and it would nix it, challenge Webb to throw downfield -- although that might have opened up Peterson crack a big run too) but Frazier discarded the only O they had in their playbook repertoire that could possibly work. Even down 2 scores, it seemed they panicked, and should have stuck to their gameplan. Unless that was just an opening gimmick.

Webb is terrible.  I knew the moment that he stepped on the field that Green Bay would win.  Ponder may not be great, but he's a much more poised pocket passer and that's exactly what AP needs to set up the run. 

To cut the guy a little slack, this is the first game he has played this season, against the second best overall defense in the NFL. He may not be great, but there are a bunch of starting QBs who have done a lot worse this season under far less demanding conditions.

Ravens up against the Colts at the half, I'm a bit surprised, I still think the Colts will come through it in the second half and win though.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on January 06, 2013, 01:23:36 PM
Fuck, Cleveland, you seriously want to look at WHISENHUNT for HC? Really? After the colossal fuckup that was the last two years in Arizona? Sure, he got them to the Super Bowl... or I should say, KURT WARNER got them to the Super Bowl before almost getting killed. Whisenhunt had like 4 or 5 years to get a decent offensive line and the only thing it was offensive to was his QB's health. And THAT'S the guy you like?

Failboat.

All we got are short straws left. Why on earth we are not considering Lovie is beyond my comprehension.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 06, 2013, 03:06:47 PM
Colts without their real head coach from the regular season wasn't going to end well. I would have liked to see that match with Arians on the sidelines.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 06, 2013, 04:10:14 PM
Shannahan gives me yet another reason to hate his guts even more. I think RG3 just did something really bad to that knee. He shouldn't have been out there in the second half.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on January 06, 2013, 04:11:17 PM
That looked like an ACL injury to me.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 06, 2013, 04:40:49 PM
I find it amusing that the Bears are looking to the CFL for a head coach though  :grin:
Marc Trestman has extensive NFL experience.  He's also been very successful in the CFL.  Would having a coach with lots of experience with professional players not be better than one that has only coached college kids?  Its much easier getting young college players to do what you want rather than millionaire professionals.  I've seen a lot of highly regarded college coaches flop big time in the NHL because they can't handle the transition.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marc_Trestman
Trestman is considered a quarterback guru, though not in the same league as Gruden, and the Bears need somebody to help Cutler develop.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on January 06, 2013, 04:49:45 PM
They need an offensive line to help keep him alive first  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 06, 2013, 05:16:06 PM
True.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 06, 2013, 05:22:57 PM
Colts without their real head coach from the regular season wasn't going to end well. I would have liked to see that match with Arians on the sidelines.

Would have been interesting, though they made the right adjustments at the right times (countering the constant blitzes with bubble screens and the like).  The big problem is they got down and had to abandon the running game which they were killing the Ravens and instead ask a rookie to throw over 50 times in a game.  You can't do that.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Surlyboi on January 06, 2013, 05:35:40 PM
That looked like an ACL injury to me.

My knee bent like that once, ACL and MCL both went pop.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 06, 2013, 06:21:00 PM
Colts without their real head coach from the regular season wasn't going to end well. I would have liked to see that match with Arians on the sidelines.
I know Pagano was still working even while receiving treatment and Arians wasn't a head coach for a full season but I hope Arians gets Coach of the Year honors. He really did do a remarkable job.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 06, 2013, 07:14:40 PM
Arians absolutely deserves Coach of the Year, no question whatsoever. Just like Adrian Peterson deserves MVP without one shred of doubt in my mind. Harvin wasn't even there most of the year so AP really was their only weapon, Ponder had no one to throw to and is in his 2nd year and inconsistent. And yet AP almost broke a fucking record after coming back from an ACL. Manning is a close second, but Manning at least had weapons (Thomas and Decker seem legit wideouts with a non-Tebow throwing to them). AP had an O line and nothing else.

The Colts looked good when they were able to run except that they couldn't get it done in the red zone. The Good Flacco showed up as well, which pretty much sealed the deal for the Ravens.

RGIII should NOT have been out there after that second TD. He didn't look right at all. They have got to teach that kid to slide because he took way too many hits in this game and all year from running. They also need to get their stories straight about his injuries because it looks like they are putting him out there without any thought to the fact that the franchise is BUILT on his ass. He pops an ACL, DONE. Cousins looks like he could be a decent pocket passing QB but he ain't going to sell jerseys or tickets. They better learn to wrap that motherfucker in some wool and swaddle his ass. The Seahawks deserved that win because they adjusted continually and shut down RGIII. I would have liked to have seen this game with a healthy QB for the Skins. They need to upgrade their defense next year. HARD.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on January 07, 2013, 12:14:13 AM
It was a shame that Shanahan didn't pull him.  Everybody watching knew he shouldn't be in that game after the first quarter.  I am pre-programmed to dislike the Redskins, but it is hard not to like that kid.

Not that I think pulling him would have made the difference.  Pretty sure Cousins would have gotten clobbered.  The Seahawks won this game four weeks ago when the injury first occurred.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on January 07, 2013, 08:51:28 AM
How can the NFL pay lip service to player safety (concussion protocol, rule changes, fines for excessively violent hits) and still have a fucking PLAYOFF game on a 'field' like FedEx? It was fucking painted sand. I love me some RGIII, but the Redskins deserved to lose their franchise player for making him (and everyone else) play in that shit. Seahawks lost Chris Clemons, which will cripple their shitty pass rush even further.

Just another reason to hate Dan Snyder, I guess.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 07, 2013, 08:57:13 AM
Just another reason to hate Dan Snyder, I guess.

I gotta agree with you there. There's no fucking excuse in this day and age with the NFL making BUH-BILLIONS in revenue to be playing on a field that fucking shitty, and especially not when you have one of the richest franchises in the league hosting the game. It was a fucking travesty. Not only was Clemons hurt, and RGIII maybe hurt worse, but the Seattle kicker as well. Snyder and the Skins ought to be fined for that shit. Fucking Lambeau was in better shape, in shittier weather with goddamn paid volunteer work to clear the snow.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on January 07, 2013, 10:24:39 AM
A lot of the stadiums built in the last 10ish years seem to have shitty playing surfaces. FedEx last night, the new Soldier Field pretty much any time people play on it, and that place in Arizona that the Cards play in (remember the Auburn Oregon title game? absolute sloppy turf) come to mind.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 07, 2013, 10:48:23 AM
Do people prefer turf for sentimental or aesthetic reasons? Having played on a mix of grass, sand-based astro, and rubber-based astro I can testify that the rubber-based astros are better in pretty much every single way.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on January 07, 2013, 10:52:59 AM
Do people prefer turf for sentimental or aesthetic reasons? Having played on a mix of grass, sand-based astro, and rubber-based astro I can testify that the rubber-based astros are better in pretty much every single way.

I played on all 3 in college and much preferred grass.  As a defensive player it slowed things down and was a lot easier on the elbows and knees.  Turf burn sucks.

Note: I played in the 80's.  I imagine turf is much better now.   


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on January 07, 2013, 11:10:31 AM
Turf sucks.

The science has gotten better, but still, you're playing on a gradation of concrete.

They keep trying to do natural turf indoors but that is beset with problems -- unrooted, slippery, etc.…

Which is why I am all for outlawing domed stadiums.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 07, 2013, 11:14:29 AM
Pre-2000 turf was horrific. Post-2000 with the advent of Field Turf is a lot less annoying.

Also, whiny soccer players hate it, which makes it even better in my book.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 07, 2013, 11:54:42 AM
Do people prefer turf for sentimental or aesthetic reasons? Having played on a mix of grass, sand-based astro, and rubber-based astro I can testify that the rubber-based astros are better in pretty much every single way.

I played on all 3 in college and much preferred grass.  As a defensive player it slowed things down and was a lot easier on the elbows and knees.  Turf burn sucks.

Note: I played in the 80's.  I imagine turf is much better now.   

I have played on the old style astro and I'd agree, it's dire. Perhaps I just haven't had the joy of playing on a pristine turf pitch that an NFL player might enjoy, but the third generation astros we have over here in the UK are pretty neat. The universities love them because they are all-weather and suit pretty much all sports; although they are pretty expensive.

As far as contact goes, they're no less unforgiving than playing on frozen ground, which is bloody painful. The newer turf technologies have several layers that seem to mitigate the impacts. Then again, I'm not taking hits with NFL levels of force, so perhaps that changes things.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on January 08, 2013, 02:40:33 AM
By they way - and I am almost afraid to even bring this up - but am I the only person in the world that actually doesn't like Ray Lewis?  I mean, his football ability over the last 15 years is one thing I won't take away from the guy, but I really just don't like him much at all.  I am peripherally aware of his obstruction of justice charge way back in the day, but it isn't even that (though it probably has something to do with it).  He just annoys the fuck out of me, what with his stupid dancing and over-the-top inspirational speech bullshit.  SETTLE DOWN DUDE.  And then everyone has to copy all that shit.  He'll probably end up doing TV along with Terry, Howie and Jimmy and fit in just super with all their irritating bullshit.

Is it just me?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on January 08, 2013, 02:49:57 AM
You're not alone my friend.  That stupid 'dance' he does before a game makes me want to stab a kitten.  Let's form a support group.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on January 08, 2013, 02:51:27 AM

Is it just me?

No. Can't stand him personally.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on January 08, 2013, 03:27:39 AM
You're not alone my friend.  That stupid 'dance' he does before a game makes me want to stab a kitten.  Let's form a support group.

When I saw him go onto the field for the Victory Formation against the Colts and then do that little dance after the last snap...I was hoping Pagano would go kick him in the vas deferens.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on January 08, 2013, 07:30:36 AM
I'm mixed with Lewis. I like the speeches, the dance, etc because I attribute that to him being a team leader and helping to pump up his team. Great player, great leader, and great for the game in his way he adjusts (which is showing that players need to keep up with the game or they'll not be aroudn for 17 years like he has been).

On the other hand, I still have the obstruction of justice around the deaths of two people and the settlements with the families of the deceased in the back of my head whenever I see him on the field.

As for the TV stuff, he alraedy signed a deal with ESPN (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/01/03/report-ray-lewis-agrees-to-deal-to-join-espn/) last Thursday, he'll be on Monday Night Countdown


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 08, 2013, 07:31:34 AM
You are not the only one. The obstruction of justice thing that everyone in the punditry just handwaves away or outright ignores makes me leery of the guy anyway. Having to listen to him on Sundays makes me glad I only watch NFL games on Tivo when I can fast forward through the bullshit.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 08, 2013, 07:43:02 AM
Yeah, I don't like it when we give these guys a pass for being complete jackasses and getting arrested just because they're sports figured.  Doug Gottleib got kicked out of Notre Dame for stealing credit cards, but look at him now.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on January 08, 2013, 07:49:59 AM
You're not alone my friend.  That stupid 'dance' he does before a game makes me want to stab a kitten.  Let's form a support group.

No one likes Ray Lewis except ESPN.

Wouldn't mind if the Ravens went out and won the Superbowl next year just to spite him. I seriously wonder if they get sick of being told how to be a 'real man' and all that other shit that is the Ray Lewis act.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 08, 2013, 07:52:33 AM
I like his leadership style. He's an intense player who inspires the best from his teammates. He's helped give good advice to other players who don't understand how the company you keep is a big deal in the NFL. The reason people don't talk about the obstruction of justice charge anymore is A - It was 13 years ago, and B - He and his friends were acquitted of any murder charges.

This could easily happen again if the Falcons make the NFC Championship. The problem with Atlanta is that if you're out after 2AM, and you are at any club, you have already made a very bad life decision. Knowing what we know about this city, that doesn't end well. Second, if you see a fight outside a club, run the fuck away. It's almost a given that after any huge event in this city, someone will end up dead by club violence.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 08, 2013, 11:18:03 AM
I'm not sure it is fair to say he's been given a complete pass; it got plenty of attention at the time and the message now is more that he turned his shit around rather than he kept on the same path and they're just sweeping it under the rug.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 08, 2013, 11:25:49 AM
Jets fired their OC. This proves what I believed all along. The butt fumble was a scheme issue.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on January 08, 2013, 11:28:44 AM
Jets fired their OC. This proves what I believed all along. The butt fumble was a scheme issue.  :oh_i_see:

Just add Sparano to the list of ex-Dolphin head coaches who should have never been hired as coordinators.  See Also: Dave Wannstadt, Cam Cameron


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 08, 2013, 11:30:58 AM
Jets fired their OC. This proves what I believed all along. The butt fumble was a scheme issue.  :oh_i_see:

Obviously they think he'll be a bad fit with Alex Smith next year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 08, 2013, 05:38:10 PM
Jets fired their OC. This proves what I believed all along. The butt fumble was a scheme issue.  :oh_i_see:

Obviously they think he'll be a bad fit with Alex Smith next year.

Also, apparently the problem with Dallas was their defense as Rob Ryan is now out on the street.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 08, 2013, 05:40:56 PM
Not surprising. They didn't play to their potential, notwithstanding the many injuries they had.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 08, 2013, 07:40:01 PM
Coaching. It's always about never wanting to hire good enough coaching in Dallas. Thanks again Jer.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 08, 2013, 08:38:30 PM
He learned his lesson with Jimmy Johnson -- never again! :awesome_for_real:

* Yeah I know he hired Bill Parcells post-Johnson but Jones was desperate at the time


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 08, 2013, 09:04:05 PM
I keep hoping he'll get more and more desperate as he realizes he's going to die. But I think he and Satan have already struck a deal to let his sorry plastic ass live to 100, then pass it along to his shitburger kids.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on January 08, 2013, 09:07:04 PM
Coaching. It's always about never wanting to hire good enough coaching in Dallas. Thanks again Jer.

Any sufficiently good coach isn't going to submit to Jerry Jones' stipulations about running the organization.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 09, 2013, 07:54:10 AM
Rob Ryan wasn't the problem in Dallas. It was A problem, but they had worse problems on the O Line than they ever did in defense. Their biggest problem on defense was quality in depth, not the coaching. And that's a GM problem, which means it's Jerry's fucking problem, which means FIRE THE DC!!!!!

I look forward to seeing Jerry Jones' "I didn't make the playoffs AGAIN!" face next year.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 09, 2013, 08:05:14 AM
Rob Ryan actually did a decent job, considering the circumstances.  I imagine he'll get hired pretty quickly by someone.  He's an obnoxious fucker, but I guess that comes with the territory on the Ryans.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 10, 2013, 11:59:13 AM
NFL teams make some interesting choices.  The Cowpeople are apparently interested in Monte Kiffin and the Eagles are interviewing Brian Kelly.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on January 10, 2013, 12:24:06 PM
Good. That will bring in some new blood to the system instead of teams just playing musical chairscoaches.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 10, 2013, 12:34:50 PM
Brian Kelly is new, but... Kiffin? Not so much.

Packers (LB), Bills(LB), Vikings(LB), Jets (LB), Vikings (DC), Vikings (LB), Saints (DC), Buccanneers (DC)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 10, 2013, 12:47:48 PM
Monte Kiffiin is OLD SKOOL YO. He's the reason Gruden and Brad Johnson has a Super Bowl ring. He's also nothing like the douchenozzle his son is.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on January 10, 2013, 12:53:40 PM
I'm aware he's been around, but he's been out of the NFL for a few years now. The NFL in the last few years has really changed pretty quickly(though admittedly I thought he left back around '04 when I first typed that comment) while he's been away. Still, at this point, I consider him new blood for the sake of making it so teams don't just trade coaches through firing and hiring processes.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 10, 2013, 01:00:02 PM
Of course the Cowboys are considering Monte Kiffin. His position on our failboat will be the old seadog that dies at the Admiral Benbow.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 10, 2013, 01:07:11 PM
Monte Kiffin is fucking ancient.  The guy is 72.  He needs to retire. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 10, 2013, 01:08:49 PM
He's still better than a lot of the candidates that may be available.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 10, 2013, 03:17:04 PM
Getting nervous about this game; kind of wishing we'd given Alex his starting job back.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 10, 2013, 03:40:18 PM
They can always bring him off the bench :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on January 10, 2013, 06:31:22 PM
Nate silver predicts the Pats will win the SB.  It's all over folks!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 10, 2013, 06:52:46 PM
He's still better than a lot of the candidates that may be available.

He's not an upgrade from what they had.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 11, 2013, 06:16:58 AM
Kiffin? I actually do think he's an upgrade over Rob Ryan. He doesn't make himself the center of attention, he just quietly goes out there and produces top 10 defenses, year in and year out.

Also, Browns hire Carolina's offensive coordinator to be their head coach. The guy who couldn't get a consistent running game going with Cam Newton, Johnathan Stewart and DeAngelo Williams. I am so, so sorry. Apparently, your new owners hate Cleveland too.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 11, 2013, 06:42:52 AM
I can't figure out if Cleveland is actually trying to fail, or if it's just their natural state.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on January 11, 2013, 07:28:09 AM
I can't figure out if Cleveland is actually trying to fail, or if it's just their natural state.

You are asking this? You? You of statistics?

I would never ask anyone ot look at the statistical trends of any Cleveland sports team, but come on... we gained the Factory of Sadness label on some off-the-cuff, local comedian's youtube rant. Do I need to say more?

I read the story about hiring the Chud last night and my first reaction was: Wait, who? then... was he even on the list - anyone's list? then... knee jerk reaction decision to get ANYONE to coach in Cleveland? then... *drink* /cry.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 11, 2013, 07:47:19 AM
Kiffin? I actually do think he's an upgrade over Rob Ryan. He doesn't make himself the center of attention, he just quietly goes out there and produces top 10 defenses, year in and year out.

Also, Browns hire Carolina's offensive coordinator to be their head coach. The guy who couldn't get a consistent running game going with Cam Newton, Johnathan Stewart and DeAngelo Williams. I am so, so sorry. Apparently, your new owners hate Cleveland too.

Except when he's coaching in college, with significantly better talent than his peers.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 11, 2013, 08:20:37 AM
You are asking this? You? You of statistics?

Well see, that's the issue. Statistics don't really show you the motivation of a front office. The only show the failure.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 11, 2013, 08:22:13 AM
Except when he's coaching in college, with significantly better talent than his peers.

I don't think you can hold that against him. The gulf in motivating players in the college and NFL gap is wide. Honestly, the only guy I've ever seen pull it off really well was Jimmy Johnson. Although if Pete Carroll wins a fucking super bowl, he goes on that list, even if I think he's a douche.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 12, 2013, 02:04:35 PM
Denver is getting absolutely raped by the officials.

I don't think you can hold that against him. The gulf in motivating players in the college and NFL gap is wide. Honestly, the only guy I've ever seen pull it off really well was Jimmy Johnson. Although if Pete Carroll wins a fucking super bowl, he goes on that list, even if I think he's a douche.

I disagree with this (I know you're shocked that I would disagree with you  :why_so_serious:).  If you can't do better than USC did in the past 2 years with overwhelmingly superior talent you aren't that good. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on January 12, 2013, 05:49:46 PM
So... you can just practice a fieldgoal during a time out?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 12, 2013, 06:40:56 PM
The officiating in that Denver game was frankly a sham. I have no idea what the hell they were thinking on the pass interference calls.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 12, 2013, 07:37:12 PM
The officiating in that Denver game was frankly a sham. I have no idea what the hell they were thinking on the pass interference calls.

Officiating was terrible - some of the ticky tack BS they were calling on both teams and taking 15 minutes to do it was inexcusable.  Almost as bad as having to listen to Dierdorf.

Going into this, I figured we maybe had a chance, but it was going to ride on the defense and using Rice to keep Manning off the field. There was no way in hell if I knew it was going to be over 70+ pts I'd have picked the Ravens to win.  But here we are.   Though Special Teams needs to have a new asshole ripped into them.  Punt and a kickoff returned for a touchdown is beyond terrible.

Honestly though - in spite of a billion questionable calls - it was a hell of a game to watch.  Easily the most exciting game I've seen all season.

As for Tucker sneaking in a practice kick between OT quarters - it's against the rules, but no penalty.  So the refs should have seen what he was up to and put an end to it.

Awesome photo from the AP



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on January 12, 2013, 07:51:24 PM
suck it Peyton.

Btw 31 seconds left, two timeouts, a gassed Baltimore D and  only needing a field goal to win and they kneel on it?  Deserve to lose after that cop out.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Draegan on January 12, 2013, 07:52:33 PM
Feels so good to root against Rogers.  He's such an unlikable douchebag.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 12, 2013, 08:27:13 PM
There has been an almost astounding lack of defense in these games.

And, that's going to be why my picks are going to go right down the crapper.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 12, 2013, 11:10:06 PM
Getting nervous about this game; kind of wishing we'd given Alex his starting job back.
Or not :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 13, 2013, 12:55:06 AM
Denver's D ought to be ashamed. Joe Flacco completes a long bomb to tie the fucking game? When you're in prevent D and your safety gets BEAT DEEP? WTF?

Still pissed about the Packers game. I mean, it isn't like Capers couldn't see what Kaepernick was doing to the defense ALL FUCKING GAME, and he managed to adjust for it twice by my reckoning. Giving up over 300 fucking rushing yards, most of which went to a scrambling QB? Fucking shameful.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on January 13, 2013, 03:22:56 AM
I'm completely stunned by Denver's loss.  Can't believe they let the Ravens stick around like that.  In the 'Battle of the Douchebag Teams', looks like we're seeing why Alex Smith was kicked to the curb.  Now those annoying fucking Packers can go home and sell sandwiches and life insurance. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 13, 2013, 12:36:20 PM
Atlanta is fucking awful. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 13, 2013, 01:07:06 PM
Bleh I didn't want to play the Seahawks again.

EDIT: Haw, it worked!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on January 13, 2013, 01:11:01 PM
You're likely not, Pete Carrol's attempt to "ice" Matt Bryant backfired after a great final drive by Atl. Only a couple seconds left for Wilson to drive and Sea to kick their own FG


Edit: k wtf was up with that last kick by Atl? giving it to them on their 45. :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on January 13, 2013, 01:11:10 PM
Way to go Pete.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 13, 2013, 01:14:57 PM
This playoff season is hard on me, having to root against Aaron Rogers, Marshawn Lynch and Tony Gonzalez.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hawkbit on January 13, 2013, 01:20:29 PM
Way to go Pete.  :awesome_for_real:

Ice the kicker fail.  What a tool.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on January 13, 2013, 01:22:25 PM
Basically the four least endearing teams left in the playoffs (as I do not think Houston can win today) for me.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 13, 2013, 01:25:52 PM
Way to go Pete.  :awesome_for_real:

Ice the kicker fail.  What a tool.

I hate it so damn much. Course, the classic icicing fail couldn't have happened to a nicer coach.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 13, 2013, 01:27:23 PM
Falcons need to learn it's 4 quarters. Not 3 quarters and OH FUCK ONE MINUTE.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on January 13, 2013, 01:28:14 PM
I think Atlanta has the worst tackling secondary I've ever seen.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 13, 2013, 01:30:04 PM
I think Atlanta has the worst tackling secondary I've ever seen.

Green Bay could give them a run for that title.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 13, 2013, 01:33:16 PM
I don't get hating on the 49ers or the Falcons. I mean, part of why I am rooting for the 49ers this postseason is guilt (they so could've won the Superbowl last year.), and I know that is just my own brain damage, but I don't find them particularly unlikable. Harbaugh is kind of a douche? I guess? Is that it? And the Falcons ... are just kinda there for me. They exist. Much like the Texans.

I fucking hate the Ravens, though, so fuck them. :why_so_serious: And I always enjoy when the Patriots lose. The Texans are another "they sure do exist" team, so I guess I'm rooting for them!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 13, 2013, 01:47:55 PM
I don't hate the niners anymore. The Falcons are just silly.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 13, 2013, 01:55:31 PM
To be fair, even when the 49ers were a DYNASTY or whatever, I only ever actually cared much about them and how they were doing when they were playing against the Giants. Just never bothered to gear up the Sport Hate for them. And yet, I hate the Broncos because they played the Giants in the Superbowl ONCE (and I instantly hated Elway, for some reason). My sport hate is weird.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on January 13, 2013, 02:20:43 PM
I like the Falcons.  They were my team growing up (OK the Lions too), but once my state got the Titans I switched over.  The Falcs are all I have left to root for; I actively despise all remaining teams. 

The Falcons are in their prime.  Seattle is on the rise, they'll be back.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Azuredream on January 13, 2013, 03:35:12 PM
I'm happy and surprised the Falcons won, they've been shitting the playoff bed the last few years. I think they'll get pasted in the NFC championship game though.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 13, 2013, 04:17:33 PM
Is is just me or have we seen some hilariously shitty secondary play in all these games?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 13, 2013, 04:32:23 PM
Is is just me or have we seen some hilariously shitty secondary play in all these games?

All season - I think it's a combo of if you think about touching a wide receiver you get a PI flag and nobody knows how to take a proper angle and actually tackle - they all want to jump routes or do shitty arm tackles because it looks cool or something.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 13, 2013, 04:36:47 PM
Yeah, and it's amazingly bad in the case of Denver, Seattle, and Atlanta in these last games. The Patriots and Texans are also putting on a clinic of how to fuck up coverages.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 13, 2013, 04:55:10 PM
So how close to the actual snap was the Seahawk time-out when they tried to ice the kicker or whatever? I ask because apparently a certain head coach is whining the Falcon's kicker took a "practice kick" when he called time out.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 13, 2013, 05:04:12 PM
I really thought the Seahawks would take it all the way; it's a shame they're out, they are generally a pretty fun team to watch.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 13, 2013, 06:03:17 PM
I love that Pete Carroll called a time out (which was quite obvious from reading his lips in the replay) and then bitched about it to the refs.   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on January 13, 2013, 06:06:14 PM
So how close to the actual snap was the Seahawk time-out when they tried to ice the kicker or whatever? I ask because apparently a certain head coach is whining the Falcon's kicker took a "practice kick" when he called time out.

Live it looked to me like it was well after the whistles could be heard on tv. I was annoyed with it.

Fuck Atlanta its a shame Lynch coughed up that fumble in the early going. I liked the 4th down go for it call and Wilson taking a sack was just one of the things you get when you start a rookie qb.

He was bitching because he called the timeout way early and then the kicker took the entire kick. Which means he really shouldn't have called a timeout. Icing is stupid. If you are going to do it make it well before they have lined up.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 13, 2013, 06:12:14 PM
Is is just me or have we seen some hilariously shitty secondary play in all these games?

Secondary play AND special teams. The amount of just shit slap at a guy's shoulder pads with your sissy hands tackles that I've seen out of cornerbacks and safeties this playoffs is crazy. And when the fuck did NFL special teams coaches start teaching their punt returners to try to catch the ball at the 10 yard line? Ross dropped that punt in the Packers game yesterday and I was screaming! Why would you even fucking TRY to catch it? You aren't going to do anything with it that deep. Let it drop and get the fuck away. And then it happened again today and I just don't understand it. That's a cardinal sin.

This has to be the least excited I've been for a set of 4 finals teams in a long time. I can sort of root for the Falcons or the 49ers, but I loathe both the Ravens and the Pats. I'm trying to muster up the give a fuck to even watch the games next weekend.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ginaz on January 13, 2013, 06:19:36 PM
Is is just me or have we seen some hilariously shitty secondary play in all these games?

Secondary play AND special teams. The amount of just shit slap at a guy's shoulder pads with your sissy hands tackles that I've seen out of cornerbacks and safeties this playoffs is crazy. And when the fuck did NFL special teams coaches start teaching their punt returners to try to catch the ball at the 10 yard line? Ross dropped that punt in the Packers game yesterday and I was screaming! Why would you even fucking TRY to catch it? You aren't going to do anything with it that deep. Let it drop and get the fuck away. And then it happened again today and I just don't understand it. That's a cardinal sin.

This has to be the least excited I've been for a set of 4 finals teams in a long time. I can sort of root for the Falcons or the 49ers, but I loathe both the Ravens and the Pats. I'm trying to muster up the give a fuck to even watch the games next weekend.

I think part of the problem is how much importance is placed on the defence creating turnovers.  Defenders, esp. DBs, are more worried about knocking the ball loose or getting an interception than tackling.  Plus, when you have receivers and tight ends that are 6'5/6'6 220-250 running a 4.2, DBs might be a little skittish trying to tackle them.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 13, 2013, 06:36:42 PM
I saw at least 2 or 3 instances of DB's going for the ball punch rather than even bother to tackle in the Falcons' game and the runner got another 10-15 yards out of it. Whoever taught that needs to be slapped. TACKLE THE FUCKING GUY. Just shitty technique. This is the year of shitty tackling all around.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 13, 2013, 07:53:00 PM
At this point, the AFC is the Patriots to lose. They really couldn't ask for an easier finals opponent than the Ravens.

The NFC should be a good game. Which means it will probably be completely one-sided the ways these things are going.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Surlyboi on January 13, 2013, 08:08:37 PM
I don't care, as long as the fucking pats get wrecked. Tom Brady needs to never win a superbowl again and Bellichick needs to stop dressing like a fucking hobo.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on January 13, 2013, 11:22:35 PM
Meh.  It feels to me like, besides the Pats, the better teams all lost this weekend.  And not to other teams that inspire anything in me.

Green Bay lost because for some stupid reason Dom Capers couldn't get it through his idiot head to do something about Kaepernick.  Seattle even fucking showed you how to do it.  He isn't actually that good when you bottle him up and make him stay in the pocket.

Denver lost because of Champ Bailey being waaaay to fucking slow.  And because that Moore character has serious depth perception issues. 

Seattle lost because they kept shooting themselves in the foot.  And then, despite an amazing comeback, they decide to play soft coverage with 30 fucking seconds remaining.  30 seconds really should not be enough time for an NFL team to get in field goal position, but these days it seems the rule rather than the exception.

I think I am going to root for the Pats now.  Because that way, I will be doing something actively evil, and being evil is interesting.  Nothing else about this field is interesting.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 13, 2013, 11:58:39 PM
Green Bay lost because for some stupid reason Dom Capers couldn't get it through his idiot head to do something about Kaepernick.  Seattle even fucking showed you how to do it.  He isn't actually that good when you bottle him up and make him stay in the pocket.
The Niners intentionally did not have Kaepernick run much prior to the Green Bay game. What Green Bay saw was not on any game film (unless they wanted to watch his college days). Yes, they should've had somebody spying Kaepernick once they realized what was going on but that's basically a lose-lose situation as that opens up more single coverage for Kaepernick to throw to or more holes for Gore and the other RBs to run through.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 14, 2013, 12:03:56 AM
It helps that Gore finally figured out how to run out of the pistol, too.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 14, 2013, 06:44:33 AM
Green Bay lost because for some stupid reason Dom Capers couldn't get it through his idiot head to do something about Kaepernick.  Seattle even fucking showed you how to do it.  He isn't actually that good when you bottle him up and make him stay in the pocket.
The Niners intentionally did not have Kaepernick run much prior to the Green Bay game. What Green Bay saw was not on any game film (unless they wanted to watch his college days). Yes, they should've had somebody spying Kaepernick once they realized what was going on but that's basically a lose-lose situation as that opens up more single coverage for Kaepernick to throw to or more holes for Gore and the other RBs to run through.

They could have pulled the game film from both St. Louis games. He ran 17 times for 150 yards combined with a TD. Capers blew it completely. Even Woodson called him out for it after the game. I think they have to let him go after this, because his defense crashed and burned late in the season. It cost them a bye and a playoff loss, plus everyone was healthy. The Packers should NEVER lose a game where they put up 31 points of offense.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on January 14, 2013, 07:09:22 AM
At first I was  :drill:
(http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2013/01/13/sports/afc/afc-articleLarge.jpg)

And then I was  :ye_gods:
(http://con-cdn.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/superphoto/9d062f6591f87101260f6a706700527e.jpg)

Get that kid some glasses or something. I don't understand how you miss that angle.

Ah well, big props to the Ravens for really exploiting the speed on their WRs and the Good Flacco for showing up.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 14, 2013, 07:12:18 AM
We're all just waiting for the bad Flacco. Vegas thinks it's coming next weekend.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bunk on January 14, 2013, 07:20:16 AM
Oh Green Bay, couldn't have happened to a nicer team. The highlight for me was the slow motion, close-up replay of Clay Matthews spinning around with a "who the fuck has the ball?!?" look on his face during one of the read option plays.

I watched/listened to the first half of the Seattle game before going out, left it recording. I very nearly didn't bother watching the rest.
So much joy at the comeback! So much pain at the end.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on January 14, 2013, 07:22:33 AM
Let's not forget Champ Bailey.  He sure looked like a Pro Bowler this weekend, didn't he?  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on January 14, 2013, 07:22:52 AM
I now want the Ravens and Falcons in the SB. It can be the retirement game - T.Gonzo vs Ray 'Murda' Lewis.

That said, it will probably be the 49ers and Pats... to which I will not give a shit in the least.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on January 14, 2013, 07:26:20 AM
I wanted Seattle vs Denver. 

SF is the only team with a shot at beating NE.  You better hope SF wins next week.  If Atlanta wins, NE will DESTROY them in the SB. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 14, 2013, 07:58:22 AM
Seattle vs Denver would have been a fun match to watch, aye.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 14, 2013, 07:59:31 AM
Blergh. Still feeling a bit stunned about Sunday, but trying to focus on the positive about the season.

There was some pretty shitastic officiating in the Broncos game, but that doesn't excuse the piss-poor secondary play. Especially on that last bomb. Moore seemed to focused on trying to steal the ball instead of preventing HIM from catching the ball.

Also, some bad playcalling at the end of both halves.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 14, 2013, 07:59:58 AM
Capers blew it completely.

This. The scheme never seemed to change, even though it was fucking obvious what was going on. Putting a spy on Kaepernick should have happened after the first quarter at least. So it opens up their receivers? AND? Crabtree and Vernon Davis are the only threats in that offense that MIGHT demand special attention, and quite frankly, I think the Packers D-backs could handle them 1v1. Letting yourself get GASHED for over 300 yards rushing, over 200 of which is from QB scrambles? That's fucking criminal and it's just about all scheme.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 14, 2013, 08:32:54 AM
It's almost like they wanted to make sure Kaepernick couldn't beat them through the air. Which is hilarious because he's never thrown for more than 300 yards against anybody. HOWEVER, in two games in December, he had 50 yard runs. They should have taken the reverse approach. Prove you can beat us in the air. The first time they played that coverage it went Pick 6.

The next possession is the one you've got to just roll your eyes about. GB has them stopped, defensive holding call extends it on the 3rd down throw. Next 3rd and 10 play you let Frank Gore beat you for 45 yards on a pass. Not a receiver, mind you. Frank GORE. Then on 3rd and 8 from the 20 you let Colin go 20 yards for a TD. It was a meltdown. All the momentum is on your side. Two sacks, and 3 incompletions in a drive. One completion, one big run, and it's in the end zone the other way.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 14, 2013, 08:43:49 AM
It's almost like they wanted to make sure Kaepernick couldn't beat them through the air. Which is hilarious because he's never thrown for more than 300 yards against anybody. HOWEVER, in two games in December, he had 50 yard runs. They should have taken the reverse approach. Prove you can beat us in the air. The first time they played that coverage it went Pick 6.

The next possession is the one you've got to just roll your eyes about. GB has them stopped, defensive holding call extends it on the 3rd down throw. Next 3rd and 10 play you let Frank Gore beat you for 45 yards on a pass. Not a receiver, mind you. Frank GORE. Then on 3rd and 8 from the 20 you let Colin go 20 yards for a TD. It was a meltdown. All the momentum is on your side. Two sacks, and 3 incompletions in a drive. One completion, one big run, and it's in the end zone the other way.

Yeah, it's like they were game planning for Joe Montana, not Colin Kaepernick.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on January 14, 2013, 08:45:22 AM
OLB play contain, safeties play over the top, and corners play bump and run from the line = GB win.

I want to be a defensive coordinator in the NFL.  If only I had been a better player....


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on January 14, 2013, 09:03:17 AM
AFC championship game will depend on which Joe Flacco turns up. I expect another 31-28 game or so. Pats can only stop a team for 3 quarters (and has been this way for 6 years).

I want the rematch with the 49ers though. A lot of that craptastic December game was Pats playing shitty and coughing up the ball. However if SF beats us in the SB then we can definitely say Kapernickers is legit.

Mind you our kick coverage team better fucking improve. After the first 94 yard run back it took our kicker making two illegal tackles to stop that guy after that (a horse collar and a trip).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 14, 2013, 11:26:13 AM
OLB play contain, safeties play over the top, and corners play bump and run from the line = GB win.

I want to be a defensive coordinator in the NFL.  If only I had been a better player....
That's an even worse setup than what I was proposing (a spy linebacker). The Niners were having great success running Gore and the other RBs between the tackles (they even talked about that during the broadcast). Keeping the strong safety deep and the OLBs wide would've made that just that much easier.

Edit: RBs


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 14, 2013, 11:48:06 AM
No, see you send Woodson into the spy role, play 5 DB's and let the 4 non-Woodson guys cover the shit out of the 49ers wideouts/TE. Because let me tell you, Sam Shields, Tramon Williams and Casey Hayward can fucking cover a motherfucker. If Kaepernick beats you in the air, SO BE IT. By the 2nd half, Capers should have figured out that they were beating the shit out of you on the ground with broken contain and scrambling. There are maybe 4 teams in the NFL I would be worried about beating the Packers secondary this year on the pass - New England, New Orleans and Denver (because of Peyton Manning, Tom Brady and Drew Brees) and New York (also because of a Manning but only on a good day). Others might threaten, but I don't think they could beat Green Bay purely with the pass if the Pack shuts down the run and the scrambling. No one on the NFC side could do it - provided the Pack stopped the run.

The Pack got outgameplanned and outplayed.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 14, 2013, 12:05:03 PM
I dunno, it seems pretty clear that GB largely couldn't stop the run, all year. I'm not sure there was a game plan available to them that was going to effectively shut down the SF running game. They were 26th in the league in YPC allowed. They took 3 games to solve Adrian Peterson and he's alone in that offense, Ponder can run OK but he's not exactly what I'd call a multiple threat sort of guy.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 14, 2013, 12:17:55 PM
Packers were #16 against the run at the end of the year. For the most part they kept the rushing under 100 yards, with Frank Gore and Adrian Peterson being the ones that ran all day over them.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 14, 2013, 12:45:44 PM
I prefer to look at YPC instead as a better indicator, personally. Yes, YPG they were 16th but that's going to be at least partially a function of them being up on people because their offense was good, and thus their opponents passing more.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 14, 2013, 12:53:37 PM
I prefer to look at YPC instead as a better indicator, personally. Yes, YPG they were 16th but that's going to be at least partially a function of them being up on people because their offense was good, and thus their opponents passing more.

Exactly. And they were up on San Fran after that pick 6. So again, they weren't GREAT at stopping the run but they weren't bad. And they had shown they could gameplan someone who had torched them (Peterson) and shut him down by forcing him inside.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 15, 2013, 07:27:57 AM
Chargers nab McCoy. (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/254145/chargers-land-mike-mccoy-as-next-head-coach) :/


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on January 15, 2013, 07:32:09 AM
That's an even worse setup than what I was proposing (a spy linebacker). The Niners were having great success running Gore and the other RBs between the tackles (they even talked about that during the broadcast). Keeping the strong safety deep and the OLBs wide would've made that just that much easier.

Edit: RBs

My contention is that they wouldn't stop Gore anyway.  It prevents the big gain plays while keeping Kaepernick in the pocket.  Gore isn't enough to beat the Packers.  I also should have been more specific as well having the SS cheat into the middle coverage. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 15, 2013, 07:39:17 AM
Chargers nab McCoy. (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/254145/chargers-land-mike-mccoy-as-next-head-coach) :/

Ok I looked at that and thought, why in the hell would they want Colt McCoy? Then I realized he's a coach. Another offensive coach.

They don't really get it, do they?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 15, 2013, 07:41:17 AM
Chargers nab McCoy. (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/254145/chargers-land-mike-mccoy-as-next-head-coach) :/

Ok I looked at that and thought, why in the hell would they want Colt McCoy? Then I realized he's a coach. Another offensive coach.

They don't really get it, do they?

I really hate facing former coaches. A lot of people blame McCoy for certain stuff this season, but I thought his adaptability over the last couple of seasons was fantastic. I am also terrified about who we may now end up with at OC.

Clearly the only appropriate move is Norvelous Norv.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 15, 2013, 07:47:59 AM
We'll see what happens with the Pats - the big difference is that with Cam Cameron gone, all of a sudden the team remembers that have Ray fucking Rice and a pretty damn good back-up (Bernard Pierce) and don't need Flacco to throw for 50+ times a game.  Instead, they're willing to be patient, which lets an elderly defense catch its breath and keeps the opposing QB (Pey-pey and hopefully Brady) sitting on the sidelines.   It also lets Flacco actually have a chance of selling play action, which is a big help to him.

Seriously - if Cam Cameron was calling the Broncos game, Denver would have easily won.  I was talking to a friend of mine after a touchdown in which it was 1st and goal and they did 3 actual no fucking around running plays and got the touchdown.   Our guess is if it would have been Cameron calling would have been the usual stupid sequence of something like pass to Vonta Leach (their fullback) in the flats, a botched throw into the end zone to a third receiver, a QB sneak, and then a field goal.

Instead, it was Ray Rice, Ray Rice, Ray Rice, touchdown.

So, the Pats game should be interesting to see.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on January 15, 2013, 08:45:18 AM
I really hate facing former coaches. A lot of people blame McCoy for certain stuff this season, but I thought his adaptability over the last couple of seasons was fantastic. I am also terrified about who we may now end up with at OC.

Clearly the only appropriate move is Norvelous Norv.

Unless Chud gets to him first.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 15, 2013, 09:33:26 AM
Apparently the Broncos are targeting Wisenhunt. I would not be mad at this!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2013, 09:37:35 AM
We'll see what happens with the Pats - the big difference is that with Cam Cameron gone, all of a sudden the team remembers that have Ray fucking Rice and a pretty damn good back-up (Bernard Pierce) and don't need Flacco to throw for 50+ times a game.  Instead, they're willing to be patient, which lets an elderly defense catch its breath and keeps the opposing QB (Pey-pey and hopefully Brady) sitting on the sidelines.   It also lets Flacco actually have a chance of selling play action, which is a big help to him.

Seriously - if Cam Cameron was calling the Broncos game, Denver would have easily won.  I was talking to a friend of mine after a touchdown in which it was 1st and goal and they did 3 actual no fucking around running plays and got the touchdown.   Our guess is if it would have been Cameron calling would have been the usual stupid sequence of something like pass to Vonta Leach (their fullback) in the flats, a botched throw into the end zone to a third receiver, a QB sneak, and then a field goal.

Instead, it was Ray Rice, Ray Rice, Ray Rice, touchdown.

So, the Pats game should be interesting to see.
Stop it with the 3 spaces after periods. Use one space, or two if your muscle memory is too ingrained.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on January 15, 2013, 09:55:29 AM
I am also terrified about who we may now end up with at OC.

Peyton Manning.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 15, 2013, 09:58:46 AM
I am also terrified about who we may now end up with at OC.

Peyton Manning.

Touche.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 15, 2013, 10:19:43 AM
We'll see what happens with the Pats - the big difference is that with Cam Cameron gone, all of a sudden the team remembers that have Ray fucking Rice and a pretty damn good back-up (Bernard Pierce) and don't need Flacco to throw for 50+ times a game.  Instead, they're willing to be patient, which lets an elderly defense catch its breath and keeps the opposing QB (Pey-pey and hopefully Brady) sitting on the sidelines.  It also lets Flacco actually have a chance of selling play action, which is a big help to him.

Seriously - if Cam Cameron was calling the Broncos game, Denver would have easily won.  I was talking to a friend of mine after a touchdown in which it was 1st and goal and they did 3 actual no fucking around running plays and got the touchdown.  Our guess is if it would have been Cameron calling would have been the usual stupid sequence of something like pass to Vonta Leach (their fullback) in the flats, a botched throw into the end zone to a third receiver, a QB sneak, and then a field goal.

Instead, it was Ray Rice, Ray Rice, Ray Rice, touchdown.

So, the Pats game should be interesting to see.
Stop it with the 3 spaces after periods. Use one space, or two if your muscle memory is too ingrained.


I have no idea where the three spaces are coming from. Probably best to just break the habit entirely and focus on just using one, since apparently I get spacebar happy.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2013, 10:25:31 AM
I really hate facing former coaches. A lot of people blame McCoy for certain stuff this season, but I thought his adaptability over the last couple of seasons was fantastic. I am also terrified about who we may now end up with at OC.

Clearly the only appropriate move is Norvelous Norv.
Unless Chud gets to him first.  :oh_i_see:
Jerry will hire him :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 15, 2013, 11:26:06 AM
This is also beginning to make the rounds - with all the focus on CTE, its been easy to forget that there's a lot of other long term effects from football.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/01/13/v-fullstory/3179926/dan-le-batard-jason-taylors-pain.html#storylink=cpy



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 15, 2013, 11:39:18 AM
They are the only pro athletes that actually earn their money. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on January 15, 2013, 12:37:48 PM
This is also beginning to make the rounds - with all the focus on CTE, its been easy to forget that there's a lot of other long term effects from football.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/01/13/v-fullstory/3179926/dan-le-batard-jason-taylors-pain.html#storylink=cpy



 :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on January 15, 2013, 12:46:01 PM
This is also beginning to make the rounds - with all the focus on CTE, its been easy to forget that there's a lot of other long term effects from football.

http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/01/13/v-fullstory/3179926/dan-le-batard-jason-taylors-pain.html#storylink=cpy



 :uhrr:

Yeah I read this the other day from a buddy's post on G+.

Yeah, no. Me? nope. Never. Fuck right off with all of that. I am a guy and do stupid guy shit like ignore squeaks and twinges of pain, but that? Oh hell no.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 15, 2013, 12:48:14 PM
The part about the foot shots made me writhe - I've had several shots in my toes and the pain is kind of indescribable, and it sounds like what he had done was worse.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 15, 2013, 01:10:14 PM
Yep. Ridiculous. Do not want.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on January 15, 2013, 01:41:11 PM
I've had cortisone shots in the knee, shoulder, and ankle just to keep me on the field in college.  You would be amazed what happens in the training room when nobody is looking.  I can't begin to imagine what happens in the NFL. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 15, 2013, 01:48:45 PM
I've only had cortisone once - in my shoulder, before they decided that it was worth scoping - but it was luxury compared to local anaesthesia in the toes, like not even in the same universe of pain. Just reading the description of the foot shots made me feel ill. You people are nuts.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 15, 2013, 02:46:03 PM
I can imagine and understand the motivation - hell, Taylor even says he'd do it all again. But yah, no thanks.

On a lighter note   :why_so_serious:



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on January 15, 2013, 03:45:55 PM
You guys are joking and kidding around but HE'S still out there.  Hiding.  Lurking.  Pock-facing.  What owner will be foolish enough to invite the vampiric Lord of Despair to their city?  No one is safe until the next victim is selected by THE NORV.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 15, 2013, 04:01:35 PM
You guys are joking and kidding around but HE'S still out there.  Hiding.  Lurking.  Pock-facing.  What owner will be foolish enough to invite the vampiric Lord of Despair to their city?  No one is safe until the next victim is selected by THE NORV.



That's part of the reason I'm so happy that Caldwell is doing decently. The Ravens were pretty much at the top of the list for either Norv or Andy Reid (and Reid is already taken).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 16, 2013, 07:05:37 AM
So the Bears fired a 10-6 coach, and hired a guy from the Canadian football league.

(http://webtrax.hu/myfacewhen/faces/lineart-memes/fuck-this-shit-table-flip.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: naum on January 16, 2013, 07:58:52 AM
So the Bears fired a 10-6 coach, and hired a guy from the Canadian football league.

(http://static2.fjcdn.com/thumbnails/comments/i+lol+ed+but+seriously+what+the+fuck+man+_a6517af33ea0b7df5e2b1ba96de6bb1d.jpg)

He can accomplish in 3 downs what has taken them 4.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 16, 2013, 08:13:40 AM
Bad Lip Reading, NFL Edition

http://youtu.be/Zce-QT7MGSE


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 16, 2013, 09:11:17 AM
Morte now reporting Chip Kelly is the new Eagles HC. (https://twitter.com/mortreport/status/291590864059392000)

Of course, it seemed like it was a done deal before with Kelly, so we shall see.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on January 16, 2013, 09:19:43 AM
Morte now reporting Chip Kelly is the new Eagles HC. (https://twitter.com/mortreport/status/291590864059392000)

Of course, it seemed like it was a done deal before with Kelly, so we shall see.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8849699/chip-kelly-bolts-oregon-ducks-coach-philadelphia-eagles-sources

Yep. Odd...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on January 16, 2013, 09:22:23 AM
Win/Win for Seattle. Seahawks DC is more likely to stay put, and we get Kelly out of the Pac-12. Hurray!

I said from about October on (when it was painfully obvious that Andy Reid was on the way out) that Kelly was a natural fit for Philly. They have the athletes on offense to run his scheme. Will be interesting to watch.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 16, 2013, 09:39:41 AM
Morte now reporting Chip Kelly is the new Eagles HC. (https://twitter.com/mortreport/status/291590864059392000)

Of course, it seemed like it was a done deal before with Kelly, so we shall see.

And Oregon is going on probation in 3.....2........1.........   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 16, 2013, 10:09:26 AM
We all knew he was bolting. The NCAA sword of damocles was ready to fall this spring.

As a Cowboys fan, this move makes me go  :why_so_serious:

The Eagles problems couldn't get a lot worse, but with this chucklehead trying to run 80 players a game, somebody will end up dead.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on January 16, 2013, 10:26:20 AM
We all knew he was bolting. The NCAA sword of damocles was ready to fall this spring.

As a Cowboys fan, this move makes me go  :why_so_serious:

The Eagles problems couldn't get a lot worse, but with this chucklehead trying to run 80 players a game, somebody will end up dead.

That is not how it was put out there a week ago when every place was reporting he was staying put at ORE. Either way, I am kinda glad he is not with the Browns. I'd guess he will be an OC some where by 2016 and back in college by 2018.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 16, 2013, 10:42:24 AM
I'm sure last week they were right. He wasn't getting the offers he wanted money wise.

Thing is, he was being stubborn, and said he was going to take his ball and go home. Then he realized during the week that the NCAA was fucking serious. It didn't magically disappear in the interim. That's something reporters never learn. In their efforts to out scoop each other, you get very little background work on the real motivations of these coaches. They just assumed it was leverage. Nope, he's escaping.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on January 16, 2013, 10:59:13 AM
So the Bears fired a 10-6 coach, and hired a guy from the Canadian football league.



Look at his history, it's not like we grew him in a vat up here or anything.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 16, 2013, 11:02:29 AM
No offense intended to the CFL, but this is the Bears. One of the oldest franchises in the NFL along with the Packers. For them to hire a coach outside the league is bizarre to me, accomplished or not.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on January 16, 2013, 11:06:35 AM
No offense intended to the CFL, but this is the Bears. One of the oldest franchises in the NFL along with the Packers. For them to hire a coach outside the league is bizarre to me, accomplished or not.

Well the guy was an OC for a number of years in the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 16, 2013, 11:14:26 AM
We all knew he was bolting. The NCAA sword of damocles was ready to fall this spring.

As a Cowboys fan, this move makes me go  :why_so_serious:

The Eagles problems couldn't get a lot worse, but with this chucklehead trying to run 80 players a game, somebody will end up dead.

That is not how it was put out there a week ago when every place was reporting he was staying put at ORE. Either way, I am kinda glad he is not with the Browns. I'd guess he will be an OC some where by 2016 and back in college by 2018.

If he does fail in the NFL, he'll go right back to a head coaching job in college, those pay better than coordinator positions in the NFL, at least for the sorts of jobs Kelly would be able to land (pretty much anywhere, in other words.)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 16, 2013, 11:16:36 AM
Well the guy was an OC for a number of years in the NFL.

Right. 8 years ago, I think. I just don't get the move from an established 10-6 guy to a guy outside the league for almost a decade.

It has more to do with the juxtaposition of the exchanged people. For some reason it jives in my mind.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 16, 2013, 11:18:03 AM
It's not so much that the CFL guy is unqualified, as it is that Lovie should never have been fired in the first place, yeah.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 16, 2013, 11:31:40 AM
It's not so much that the CFL guy is unqualified, as it is that Lovie should never have been fired in the first place, yeah.
Lovie's been coasting off of his Super Bowl appearance for 6 years now. It was time for him to go.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 16, 2013, 12:33:29 PM
Sorry but that's crap. Chicago won the division in 2010. He's missed the playoffs the last two years because Green Bay has been waaaaaaaay better, and Minnesota found lightning in a bottle with AP this season. Chicago easily had the roster to get in the playoffs next season with Lovie at the helm.

Of the 10-6 season he had, not a single one of those losses came against a team that missed the playoffs. I have a hard time hanging that on him.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 16, 2013, 12:35:33 PM
He's missed the playoffs 5 of the last 6 seasons. As I said, he's been coasting off of his Super Bowl appearance.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 16, 2013, 12:38:24 PM
I would hire him in a heartbeat in Dallas. Difference of opinion there.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 16, 2013, 12:39:21 PM
That's different. I didn't say he was a bad coach, but it was time for him to leave Chicago.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 16, 2013, 12:41:13 PM
Fair enough, some coaches out stay their welcome. I feel he's got a lot of upside for another team as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 16, 2013, 12:50:25 PM
Actually, Chicago didn't win the division the last two years because their offensive line couldn't block a cripple. Cutler was either hurt or running for his life on just about every dropback. You cut his sacks down say 15-20%, they win the division both years, IMO.

Which is just as much of a coaching issue as a player personnel issue. I'd hope the first thing Trestman does is bring in a new OC who knows how to craft blocking schemes.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Fordel on January 16, 2013, 01:08:29 PM
I'm fairly certain that man is Trestman himself actually. The OL of the Allouettes apparently increased in effectiveness dramatically as soon as he took over there, using the same players.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 16, 2013, 01:12:51 PM
Which is just as much of a coaching issue as a player personnel issue. I'd hope the first thing Trestman does is bring in a new OC who knows how to craft blocking schemes.
Reports are that they've hired New Orleans Saints offensive line coach Aaron Kromer as their offensive coordinator.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 16, 2013, 03:11:49 PM
Lovie got lucky with the right bunch of guys (that sounds weird, doesn't it?   :awesome_for_real:)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ginaz on January 16, 2013, 04:50:40 PM
No offense intended to the CFL, but this is the Bears. One of the oldest franchises in the NFL along with the Packers. For them to hire a coach outside the league is bizarre to me, accomplished or not.

There's a long history of the NFL hiring coaches from the CFL and a lot of present day NFL coaches came from the CFL.  Marv Levy is most well known, and successful, of all of them.

http://www.thestar.com/sports/football/article/1119262--nfl-coaches-gms-routinely-picked-from-cfl
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marv_Levy


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 16, 2013, 04:53:24 PM
More important is that Marv Levy is a former Cal coach.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 17, 2013, 10:20:34 AM
This (http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/8853415/2013-nfl-playoffs-boston-mayor-thomas-menino-stumbles-new-england-patriots-names) is spectacular. 

Quote
"We have Tom Brady here, we have Tom Brady here, we have Tom Brady here. He's been our point person all season long," Menino said. "And Stevan Ridley, he's been another great guy. And Wilcock."

Quote
"We have it all. (Aaron) Hernandez is going to do a great job. He'll step in for Gonk because Gonk's hurt," the mayor said, again while glancing at his notes.

How do you mess those up?  Hilarious.  I would have loved to have seen it in person.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on January 17, 2013, 10:48:32 AM
Mumbles Menino strikes again, he does this every year. The ability to form coherent sentences is obviously not required to be mayor of Boston.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 17, 2013, 11:46:18 AM
Quote
"We have it all. (Aaron) Hernandez is going to do a great job. He'll step in for Gonk because Gonk's hurt," the mayor said, again while glancing at his notes.

(http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20060615062619/starwars/images/d/d7/Gonkpromo.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 17, 2013, 12:05:08 PM
Holy shit Ryan Leaf is a fucktard (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8854058/ryan-leaf-booted-treatment-center-prison).   :ye_gods:

Meth kills.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on January 17, 2013, 01:28:49 PM
Holy shit Ryan Leaf is a fucktard (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/8854058/ryan-leaf-booted-treatment-center-prison).   :ye_gods:

Meth kills.

Good lord how far this guy has fallen. Seems he still acts the same as he always has though.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 17, 2013, 06:05:20 PM
So how many seasons before Norvelous Norv tricks a team into making him head coach again?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on January 17, 2013, 07:33:46 PM
So how many seasons before Norvelous Norv tricks a team into making him head coach again?

As many as it takes to get the Cleveland Browns a Championship as their OC.  :why_so_serious:


edit:
Oh jeesuz christ I went and looked...  http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/21569734/browns-hire-norv-turner-as-offensive-coordinator

FFFUUUuuuuu....


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 17, 2013, 08:18:19 PM
 :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 18, 2013, 12:55:58 AM
Cardinals hire Bruce Arians as head coach (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ap-source-cardinals-hire-arians-022632052--nfl.html)




Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 18, 2013, 06:19:24 AM
So how many seasons before Norvelous Norv tricks a team into making him head coach again?

As many as it takes to get the Cleveland Browns a Championship as their OC.  :why_so_serious:


edit:
Oh jeesuz christ I went and looked...  http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/21569734/browns-hire-norv-turner-as-offensive-coordinator

FFFUUUuuuuu....

Ahahaha, you posted that without knowing he actually WAS hired as your OC? It's your fault.  :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on January 18, 2013, 06:22:27 AM

As many as it takes to get the Cleveland Browns a Championship as their OC.  :why_so_serious:


edit:
Oh jeesuz christ I went and looked...  http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/blog/eye-on-football/21569734/browns-hire-norv-turner-as-offensive-coordinator

FFFUUUuuuuu....

Ahahaha, you posted that without knowing he actually WAS hired as your OC? It's your fault.  :heart:

It was all rumored and I never checked to see if it panned out. So the hints were there and I thought I'd make a funny reference to them. Egg, meet face.

That said, Norv is not a bad OC at all, just not a HC. This might actually work out well. (Leave me alone, I am a Browns fan - let me have my fantasies.)

edit to add:
Oh and I just noticed this gem of a website: http://factoryofsadness.co/


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 18, 2013, 06:32:28 AM
Cardinals hire Bruce Arians as head coach (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ap-source-cardinals-hire-arians-022632052--nfl.html)

It's a great move for the Cardinals. They will get a guy who can lead in difficult circumstances, which is exactly what they need.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 18, 2013, 08:13:34 AM
They also need an offensive line and a QB.  :awesome_for_real:

Also, Cleveland  :why_so_serious:

Of course they hired Norv. If you're going to fail anyway, you might as well fail as spectacularly as possible. They should have just grabbed Mike Martz.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 18, 2013, 09:07:57 AM
It was all rumored and I never checked to see if it panned out. So the hints were there and I thought I'd make a funny reference to them. Egg, meet face.

That said, Norv is not a bad OC at all, just not a HC. This might actually work out well. (Leave me alone, I am a Browns fan - let me have my fantasies.)

edit to add:
Oh and I just noticed this gem of a website: http://factoryofsadness.co/


Yeah, the fact he was hired for the job he's actually decent at instead of the one he's ... not is a good sign. Goodish. Good-esque. I sincerely hope it works out for them, though, the Browns are one of those teams I always halfway felt warmly towards for absolutely no good reason (also in this category: the Cardinals).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on January 18, 2013, 03:19:32 PM
Norv went to the Browns?  BWHAHAHAHHA!

What's his official title: "Head Foreman of the Factory of Sadness"?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on January 18, 2013, 04:43:32 PM
Norv went to the Browns?  BWHAHAHAHHA!

What's his official title: "Head Foreman of the Factory of Sadness"?

 :oh_i_see:

:cry:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 18, 2013, 04:52:57 PM
"Source" is reporting that the Colts will hire Stanford OC Pep Hamilton to replace Bruce Arians (http://sports.yahoo.com/news/ap-source-colts-hiring-stanfords-235822243--nfl.html).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on January 20, 2013, 12:31:13 PM
Falcons off to an impressive start.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 20, 2013, 01:06:33 PM
Falcons off to an impressive start.

Yep their problem is usually finishing. We'll see how that goes.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 20, 2013, 02:14:51 PM
Not well, apparently.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on January 20, 2013, 02:17:31 PM
Going to be another tight one.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 20, 2013, 02:46:34 PM
They better not call that a catch.

EDIT: That's some serious bullshit right there.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 20, 2013, 03:04:31 PM
Doesn't matter. Two bad calls evened out.

The catch stood up when it wasn't. The drive stayed alive on a bullshit flag that grazed a facemask. In the end, the Niners played better to the finish.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 20, 2013, 03:05:00 PM
:woot:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on January 20, 2013, 03:05:49 PM
Way to blow a 17-0 lead Failcons.  What a shitty year for my teams.  I think I'll start rooting for the Niners and Pats, that's sure to curse them.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on January 20, 2013, 03:06:10 PM
Weird last play.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 20, 2013, 03:30:35 PM
Ryan's shoulder was toast. He couldn't heave it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 20, 2013, 03:32:39 PM
Yeah, was the non throwing arm, but even that messes up your whole motion - it looked pretty bad the way he was holding it, maybe a separation?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 20, 2013, 03:38:00 PM
Yeah you could see it when he threw the last pass, he kept his left arm tucked into his body when he threw it and he couldn't put his body into it cause he was unbalanced.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nebu on January 20, 2013, 03:38:17 PM
Yeah, was the non throwing arm, but even that messes up your whole motion - it looked pretty bad the way he was holding it, maybe a separation?

I would bet a separation.  He struggled to throw downfield that last play.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 20, 2013, 03:41:19 PM
Anybody else think that Bad Flacco shows up and the Pats win by 30?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 20, 2013, 03:41:37 PM
Harbaugh's reaction to that replay call:

(http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/social_assets/nfl/2012_Postseason/NFC_Championship/HarbaughReacts.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 20, 2013, 03:43:16 PM
:awesome_for_real:

Anybody else notice that Terry Bradshaw's right hand trembles when he's holding a microphone?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 20, 2013, 04:28:18 PM
Falcons tried so hard to lose that game... and did.

Seriously, what is wrong with this team that they can't play 4 quarters of football?

My interest in the Super Bowl may actually be at an all time low.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 20, 2013, 05:17:10 PM
If Baltimore pulls off a stunner because the Patriots can't get out of their own way to score, I will probably be watching the puppy bowl.

EDIT: Also what in the hell is wrong with the Pats offense? This game should be over 3 times by now.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 20, 2013, 06:31:16 PM
Harbaugh bowl.

This may be the first time I have no interest ever.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on January 20, 2013, 06:37:00 PM
Nice Harbuagh v. Douche Harbaugh.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on January 20, 2013, 06:41:02 PM
Not particularly interested in this super bowl, but I actually think it will be a good game.

Storylines:

1) Har-bowl.

2) Ray Lewis



Yeah, I'm already out.  


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 20, 2013, 06:47:16 PM
Yep, Ravens just intercepted Brady in the end zone. The Har-Bowl it is.

Having New England not be in the Super Bowl only raises my interest slightly. About the only story worth giving a shit about is Kaepernick. And which Harbaugh is the Nice one? I thought they were both douches?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 20, 2013, 06:49:44 PM
John is the "nice" one. Jim is the "excitable" one :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Surlyboi on January 20, 2013, 06:52:18 PM
HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA-Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

Go back to your box on the streetcorner, Bellichik, you fucking hobo. And seriously, the Patriots get completely blanked in the second half and the commentators are still blowing smoke up Brady's ass. What the fuck?

That said, now I'm torn. My adopted Bay Area vs any team that beats the Patriots.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 20, 2013, 06:57:58 PM
This could easily happen again if the Falcons make the NFC Championship. The problem with Atlanta is that if you're out after 2AM, and you are at any club, you have already made a very bad life decision. Knowing what we know about this city, that doesn't end well. Second, if you see a fight outside a club, run the fuck away. It's almost a given that after any huge event in this city, someone will end up dead by club violence.

Didn't even get to the clubs this time. I hate this city when they host things:

http://msn.foxsports.com/nfl/story/atlanta-falcons-fan-stabbed-neck-by-san-francisco-49ers-fan-georgia-dome-parking-lot-after-nfc-championship-game-012013


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Surlyboi on January 20, 2013, 07:03:31 PM
Oh Jesus Christ, the comments.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 20, 2013, 07:07:34 PM
I wonder if there's another Harbough brother out there for someone to hire.  Those guys clearly have it going on right now. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 20, 2013, 07:29:45 PM
YES

There may or may not have just been an impromptu parade outside my house.  God I love living in the city sometimes.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ginaz on January 20, 2013, 10:16:14 PM
Get ready for 2 weeks of nothing but feel good stories about the Harbough brothers and Ray Lewis. :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 21, 2013, 01:13:58 AM
I wonder if there's another Harbough brother out there for someone to hire.  Those guys clearly have it going on right now. 
There's a sister, Joani, but she's not involved with football. Her husband, though, is the head coach of the Indiana men's basketball team.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 21, 2013, 01:31:11 AM
This may be the first time I have no interest ever.

I swear to God, it feels like you say this every season.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on January 21, 2013, 02:03:55 AM
YEAH BUT THIS IS THE FIRST TIME HE REALLY, REALLY MEANS IT!!

For me, once the final 4 was established...this may have been the only outcome that made it even a little bit interesting.  I like Nice Harbaugh.  I fucking HATE Mean Harbaugh.  Fuck that guy.

The only problem is that Ray Lewis still exists.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 21, 2013, 02:18:38 AM
I hate both the Ravens and the Patriots, so I was going to root for whoever the NFC team was anyway. It's just a happy coincidence it's Ingmar's team this year.  :why_so_serious:

(I DID try to console him last year with a "I promise, you guys can go to the Superbowl NEXT year." And he scoffed! He scoffed at my powers!)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 21, 2013, 04:18:07 AM
Get ready for 2 weeks of nothing but feel good stories about the Harbough brothers and Ray Lewis. :oh_i_see:

It's either that, or we'd be listening to how AWESOME Brady and Belicheck are for the millionth time.  It's not like the NFL actually bothers to come up with any new storylines ever.  

Also



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 21, 2013, 05:05:31 AM
I hate both the Ravens and the Patriots, so I was going to root for whoever the NFC team was anyway. It's just a happy coincidence it's Ingmar's team this year.  :why_so_serious:

(I DID try to console him last year with a "I promise, you guys can go to the Superbowl NEXT year." And he scoffed! He scoffed at my powers!)

Should have been pulling for the Patriots.  I think the 49ers would have a better shot against them.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 21, 2013, 06:40:55 AM
This may be the first time I have no interest ever.

I swear to God, it feels like you say this every season.

Only because I said it last year about the Giants and the Patriots  :awesome_for_real:

Seriously, though. These last 2 Super Bowls have been tough sells down here. The G-Men/Pats matchup was all northern wankery with no good guys. This matchup has small market East town v. old powerhouse from the West. Neither QB is really that compelling other than the fact CK is a running rook. The brothers Harbaugh can only be played so far since they don't actually play the game. Ray Lewis is generally unlikeable by half the populace.

The last Super Bowl that intrigued me was the Saints. Although watching Aaron Rodgers and the Pack was pretty good after the Favre shit.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 21, 2013, 08:27:37 AM
Baltimore is small market?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 21, 2013, 09:24:58 AM
Baltimore is small market?

We're not New York or Boston so don't count to most people.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 21, 2013, 09:52:12 AM
Well, yeah, but the Washington/Baltimore/Northern Virginia metropolitan area is about 6 million people, good for 7th largest in the country.  That doesn't sound like "small market" to me.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 21, 2013, 10:05:02 AM
Well, yeah, but the Washington/Baltimore/Northern Virginia metropolitan area is about 6 million people, good for 7th largest in the country.  That doesn't sound like "small market" to me.

Washington and NoVA are Redskins territory, though basically it's an ongoing debate if you lump Baltimore and DC together or not.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 21, 2013, 10:10:48 AM
It's lumped together for statistical purposes by the gubment, but I know there's fierce loyalty for the individual towns.  Two of my very good college friends (The O'Leary brothers  :awesome_for_real:) are from Baltimore.  They would cut me from navel to neck if I said they were from DC, so I get your drift.  There's probably a lot of spillover though.  The metroplex is huge


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 21, 2013, 10:30:18 AM
Baltimore is smaller market because while they crush their local market in ratings, their appeal across the nation is smaller than SF, Green Bay, Dallas, Pittsburgh, New York, Boston, or Denver. Also, they have a torn base with the Redskins.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on January 21, 2013, 11:56:41 AM
On the one hand, how the hell did Baltimore end up in the Superbowl this year?  On the other, I HATE the Patriots so I'm ok with it.

Also:



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 21, 2013, 12:12:16 PM
Baltimore is smaller market because while they crush their local market in ratings, their appeal across the nation is smaller than SF, Green Bay, Dallas, Pittsburgh, New York, Boston, or Denver. Also, they have a torn base with the Redskins.

That sounds like more of a problem with execution.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 21, 2013, 12:43:15 PM
On the one hand, how the hell did Baltimore end up in the Superbowl this year?

It's a good question because nobody saw it coming. However, we should have. The game last year came down to one kick. This year Flacco improved his passer rating in the regular season by 7 points, and Ray Rice was just as effective in the rush game. New England never really formed much of a defense, and they relied entirely on outscoring people.

For one thing, the Pats got in the red zone 6 times and only had 1 TD. That's all about the bend don't break defense of the Ravens. The other thing was the Ravens absolutely crushed the Patriots in the 3rd quarter. I mean it was so lopsided it was ridiculous. The Ravens in the 3rd quarter had the ball for 11 minutes, 26 plays, and 2 TDs. The Pats had the ball for 4 minutes and only got 55 yards. The game was won in the third quarter.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on January 21, 2013, 12:56:00 PM
On the one hand, how the hell did Baltimore end up in the Superbowl this year?  On the other, I HATE the Patriots so I'm ok with it.

Also:


 :heart: :awesome_for_real: :Love_Letters: :roffle:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Megrim on January 21, 2013, 02:37:59 PM
On the one hand, how the hell did Baltimore end up in the Superbowl this year?

It's a good question because nobody saw it coming. However, we should have. The game last year came down to one kick. This year Flacco improved his passer rating in the regular season by 7 points, and Ray Rice was just as effective in the rush game. New England never really formed much of a defense, and they relied entirely on outscoring people.

For one thing, the Pats got in the red zone 6 times and only had 1 TD. That's all about the bend don't break defense of the Ravens. The other thing was the Ravens absolutely crushed the Patriots in the 3rd quarter. I mean it was so lopsided it was ridiculous. The Ravens in the 3rd quarter had the ball for 11 minutes, 26 plays, and 2 TDs. The Pats had the ball for 4 minutes and only got 55 yards. The game was won in the third quarter.

One of the commentators even called it going into half-time: Ravens needed to make adjustments, such as letting Flacco throw the ball. They evidently did, whereas NE didn't revise or alter strategy at all, and got smoked.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 21, 2013, 03:32:31 PM
On the one hand, how the hell did Baltimore end up in the Superbowl this year?  On the other, I HATE the Patriots so I'm ok with it.

Also:


I love the look on Eli's face.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 21, 2013, 03:46:48 PM
Interesting stat about the Falcons. In terms of points scored per quarter this season:

1st quarter - 6th in the league
2nd quarter - 4th in the league
3rd quarter - 24th in the league
4th quarter - 8th in the league

I think that sums up their problem. They make terrible adjustments after half time, and lose the momentum totally.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 21, 2013, 03:52:45 PM
I think I'd like to see those stats for defense as well. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 21, 2013, 04:00:37 PM
It's also worth wondering if they had an unusual number of coin flip/choice results that ended up in them having to kick to start the 2nd half. The sample sizes involved here are small enough to make a stat like that pretty iffy to draw conclusions about.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 21, 2013, 04:02:22 PM
That's an interesting stat. For comparison, Denver go 18th-10th-1st-4th, which I guess might tally with Peyton Manning getting a feel for the other team's D, and then really opening up after half time?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 21, 2013, 04:09:34 PM
I think I'd like to see those stats for defense as well. 

Look here (http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/team-stats/)

Falcons go: 3rd > 30th > 28th > 1st

Which is just fucking weird.

Baltimore go: 18th > 17th > 21st > 6th
49ers go: 12th > 2nd > 4th > 11th

As Ingmar says, small sample sizes mean that you can't infer too heavily on this, and a lot of the samples are pretty close and aren't likely to be significantly different. Although I would hazard that Denver's average of 9.4 points in the third quarter is noteworthy, given that it's 2.5 points above the next best team (Saints). The margins are far closer everywhere else.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 21, 2013, 04:11:34 PM
I suspect they will correlate fairly strongly to time of possession by quarter, if that's available.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 21, 2013, 04:15:44 PM
I suspect they will correlate fairly strongly to time of possession by quarter, if that's available.

Perhaps, it's just odd to see an imbalance like that.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 21, 2013, 04:24:35 PM
Well, a correlation like that wouldn't rule out your conclusion at all, so there might be something there still.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 21, 2013, 04:38:33 PM
I suspect they will correlate fairly strongly to time of possession by quarter, if that's available.

I'm not sure it should; you can have a low possession percentage because you are driving the ball so fast, or because you are failing to convert downs. I suspect that down conversion percentages by quarter would be more telling, but this website (http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/team-stats/) doesn't seem to list those.

For reference though, here are the possession percentages and points scored by quarter for the Falcons, Pats and Broncos.

Code:
Falcons:

1st: 55.46% (5th) 6.2 (6th)
2nd: 50.43% (16th) 8.6 (4th)
3rd: 43.96% (31st) 4.2 (24th)
4th: 56.10% (3rd) 7.3 (8th)

Patriots:

1st: 45.38% (30th) 6.8 (1st)
2nd: 50.80% (13th) 10.9 (1st)
3rd: 54.36% (6th) 6.5 (3rd)
4th: 52.55% (11th) 9.5 (2nd)

Broncos:

1st: 50.99% (11th) 4.7 (18th)
2nd: 51.24% (11th) 7.2 (10th)
3rd: 47.32% (25th) 9.4 (1st)
4th: 59.85% (1st) 9.0 (4th)

As you can see, the Pats have low first quarter possession because they score fast, whereas the Falcons have low third quarter possession because they fail to score. At least, that's how I would read this.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 21, 2013, 04:39:11 PM
Falcons go: 3rd > 30th > 28th > 1st

Which is just fucking weird.

Baltimore go: 18th > 17th > 21st > 6th
49ers go: 12th > 2nd > 4th > 11th

As Ingmar says, small sample sizes mean that you can't infer too heavily on this, and a lot of the samples are pretty close and aren't likely to be significantly different. Although I would hazard that Denver's average of 9.4 points in the third quarter is noteworthy, given that it's 2.5 points above the next best team (Saints). The margins are far closer everywhere else.

Hence why I wanted to seeing before rendering a verdict.  I think it's incontrovertible that they sucked after halftime, regardless.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 21, 2013, 04:42:48 PM
The Patriots are sort of a special case I think, just because they're running no huddle so much of the time, on top of not having much of a running game.

That said there sure doesn't seem to be as much of a correlation as I would have guessed.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Megrim on January 21, 2013, 04:51:09 PM
So why does everyone hate the Patriots anyway? Is it 'cause Brady is so dreamy?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 21, 2013, 04:58:10 PM
There's a whole laundry list of reasons, people pick and choose from them in their own personal way.

1) They win too much and too often, so people tend to hate the frontrunner.
2) Belichek comes across as extremely unlikeable, and there's a side dish of people who think his informal dress is somehow inappropriate.
3) They're a New England sports team, and that makes them very hateable, especially because of their success around the same time as the Red Sox Series wins in 2004 and 2007, the Celtics in 2008, the Bruins in 2011, etc. New England people got very insufferable about their sports teams during that run of things going so well for them. (We could be next in San Francisco!)
4) Various flavors of Tom Brady hair hate/hot wife jealousy/whatever/etc.
5) Brady threatens to ruin the game by tying Joe Montana's number of Super Bowl wins, which is a sacrosanct record that must not be sullied. (OK maybe that one is just me.)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 21, 2013, 05:01:29 PM
After reviewing more of the stats, I think the most pertinent is the fact that the Eagles only managed to score an average of 1.9 fucking points in the first quarter of their games.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 21, 2013, 05:04:02 PM
I mostly hate the Patriots due to the one-two punch of New England Team and how fucking sick of them I got during their 18-1 ( :why_so_serious: :why_so_serious: :why_so_serious: ) season.

Brady is alarmingly good looking, though. It's not a reason I hate them, I just find it utterly surreal for some reason.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 21, 2013, 05:10:07 PM
I normally keep quiet about the Pats because I'm not on the bandwagon when it comes to hate.

Personally I kind of like the way they do well by being rounded, especially because a lot of their best players seem to be somewhat oddball, mid-round picks who have found a niche. In a way it's a shame Tebow didn't land there (he still might I guess) because Belichek seems like the sort of coach who could turn him into something, even if that something is Gronk's backup.

Reasons to love the Pats:

1) Wes Welker's press conference where he makes constant references to feet.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on January 21, 2013, 05:11:30 PM
I hate the Patriots.  I hate Belechek. I hate ESPN fawning over Brady.  I don't hate Brady.  In fact, I kind of like him.  He's got a supermodel wife, a kid, millions and seems pretty cool.  But on the field I root for him to fail.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 21, 2013, 05:23:19 PM
So why does everyone hate the Patriots anyway? Is it 'cause Brady is so dreamy?
Brady is a "local" boy so I like him, though I don't want him to get another ring cause three is enough for him (only Montana and Bradshaw get to have 4).

My dislike is all about Bill Belichick. That guy is a cheater, a bully, and a sore loser.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 21, 2013, 05:24:12 PM
There's a whole laundry list of reasons, people pick and choose from them in their own personal way.

1) They win too much and too often, so people tend to hate the frontrunner.
2) Belichek comes across as extremely unlikeable, and there's a side dish of people who think his informal dress is somehow inappropriate.
3) They're a New England sports team, and that makes them very hateable, especially because of their success around the same time as the Red Sox Series wins in 2004 and 2007, the Celtics in 2008, the Bruins in 2011, etc. New England people got very insufferable about their sports teams during that run of things going so well for them. (We could be next in San Francisco!)
4) Various flavors of Tom Brady hair hate/hot wife jealousy/whatever/etc.
5) Brady threatens to ruin the game by tying Joe Montana's number of Super Bowl wins, which is a sacrosanct record that must not be sullied. (OK maybe that one is just me.)

You can also add Brady and his incessant whining and getting his way over flags every time someone says something mean about him on the field.  Which is stupid - Brady is an absolute fantastic quarterback, so all the whining and playacting he does is just stupid.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 21, 2013, 05:28:54 PM
That guy is a cheater, a bully, and a sore loser.

I'd say that would sum up a lot of NFL coaches though. Other than Joe Philbin, I can't think of a coach who I'd imagine would be good company.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 21, 2013, 05:31:58 PM
Brady's awesome. Hate wasted on him is almost entirely jealousy instead of anything specific. I mean you can "hate" him in the same way I "hated" Spurrier as a Georgia fan, but I respect the fuck out of his talent.

Belicheat is an entirely different story. Shannon Sharpe put it best after he turned down a sideline interview because they lost. He makes it easy to hate the Patriots. Not only did he get busted cheating (and has since never won - signed, Football Gods), he goes out of his way to look disheveled on the sidelines, goes out of his way to treat everyone not on the team with total disdain, and he goes out of his way to do the bare minimum amount of press required by the league.

Compare him to a guy like Chuck Pagano (embraced the fans and the press with his story), Carroll (who's a cheat but still likable), Mike Smith (who's boring as fuck but a nice guy), and you get a juxtaposition of other playoff coaches who aren't douchenozzles in all facets except X's and O's.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: slog on January 21, 2013, 06:10:06 PM
Brady's awesome. Hate wasted on him is almost entirely jealousy instead of anything specific. I mean you can "hate" him in the same way I "hated" Spurrier as a Georgia fan, but I respect the fuck out of his talent.

Belicheat is an entirely different story. Shannon Sharpe put it best after he turned down a sideline interview because they lost. He makes it easy to hate the Patriots. Not only did he get busted cheating (and has since never won - signed, Football Gods), he goes out of his way to look disheveled on the sidelines, goes out of his way to treat everyone not on the team with total disdain, and he goes out of his way to do the bare minimum amount of press required by the league.

Compare him to a guy like Chuck Pagano (embraced the fans and the press with his story), Carroll (who's a cheat but still likable), Mike Smith (who's boring as fuck but a nice guy), and you get a juxtaposition of other playoff coaches who aren't douchenozzles in all facets except X's and O's.

What Shannon left out is that Bill never does Sideline interviews.  (And who cares?  They never say anything meaningful anyway).  Bellichek is hated because he doesn't play the media game by the unwritten rules.   


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 21, 2013, 06:11:52 PM
Eh, that's hardly the only reason.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on January 21, 2013, 07:10:55 PM
Well, I hate the Patriots because I was born and raised in Miami and am a die-hard Dolphins fan.  Plus yes, Belichick himself is a colossal dick.  The sore loser part makes him especially dickish.

Brady is incredibly handsome yes, but to me he crosses over that weird line of being too handsome which makes him strangely less attractive.  And it's hard to overlook that bit of "You think we'll only score 17? Really?" arrogance, but he sure ate those words.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 21, 2013, 07:37:39 PM
Brady is incredibly handsome yes, but to me he crosses over that weird line of being too handsome which makes him strangely less attractive.  And it's hard to overlook that bit of "You think we'll only score 17? Really?" arrogance, but he sure ate those words.  :grin:

Yeah, I think that's the "surreal" part for me, especially when you compare him to. You know. Nearly every other football player ever. :oh_i_see: He is REALLY handsome and it's just ... way out of place or something. It's weird.

And yes, he had those words crammed right down his throat best season ever woooooo


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 22, 2013, 07:05:18 AM
After reviewing more of the stats, I think the most pertinent is the fact that the Eagles only managed to score an average of 1.9 fucking points in the first quarter of their games.

That's likely less than the number of fumbles in the first quarters of their games.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on January 22, 2013, 07:10:16 AM
If you take Shannon Sharpes side on anything then you deserve to be laughed at.

Look it's simple, the Patriots win...a LOT. The only people that like that are Patriots fans. Just as it is with ANY sports team that wins a lot.
 Belichick is prickly with the media so of course that gets played up (and seriously who the fuck actually cares what he wears on the sidelines?).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 22, 2013, 08:19:12 AM
The Pats are a lot like the Spurs in the NBA.  They are really, really good in the regular season because they execute well and play hard for their coach.  But when the playoffs come around they have a fatal flaw that gets exposed-  they really aren't as talented as many of their peers.  Sure, the Pats have Brady and some really wonderful players (Parker, Duncan) but they are aging and their defense stinks.  I think they're done unless they get lucky.  They need a serious defense upgrade over the offseason. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 22, 2013, 08:43:15 AM
Their defense isn't amazing, but I'm not sure it's fair to say that it stinks. They were =9th overall in points allowed per game for the regular season, ahead of teams like the Packers, Giants, and Ravens. =5th for takeaways, and 5th in yards gained of picks.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 22, 2013, 09:44:58 AM
Their defense isn't amazing, but I'm not sure it's fair to say that it stinks. They were =9th overall in points allowed per game for the regular season, ahead of teams like the Packers, Giants, and Ravens. =5th for takeaways, and 5th in yards gained of picks.

Looking at the AFC East...oh look! It's the Patriots and 3 shitty teams without winning records. And they have the 3 and 4 worst teams in terms of scoring in the AFC. (1 and 2 are KC and Jax, Patriots played Jax). So honestly, they got to play 5 games right there against the absolute dogshit of the league. In the NFC, they pulled Arizona, who they lost to...lolwut, and the Cardinals were the worst scoring team in the NFC, and also (guess who) St. Louis at #3, who the Pats ALSO played. Almost half their games were against teams that couldn't score consistently on Savannah State.

When the Pats faced teams that made the playoffs, they were 3-3. They were also 0-2 against the two teams in the Super Bowl right now giving up an average of 36 points.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 22, 2013, 09:55:01 AM
Their defense isn't amazing, but I'm not sure it's fair to say that it stinks. They were =9th overall in points allowed per game for the regular season, ahead of teams like the Packers, Giants, and Ravens. =5th for takeaways, and 5th in yards gained of picks.

It was shitty for the playoffs. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 22, 2013, 02:00:34 PM
 :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill:


Edit by Trippy: Jesus Christ that GIF is larger than a video would've been (it's 21 MB).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Zetleft on January 22, 2013, 04:44:15 PM
:drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill:


Edit by Trippy: Jesus Christ that GIF is larger than a video would've been (it's 21 MB).

:heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on January 22, 2013, 04:53:45 PM
At first I was like :| But then I was like  :heart: :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 22, 2013, 08:30:33 PM
The only downside is that now we have to put up with 2 weeks off, and NFL still pretending the ProBowl matters. Good news is that Peyton and Brady are free now.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Bungee on January 25, 2013, 12:20:03 PM
If anybody is going to talk about unlikeable coaches who are sore losers and just straight dicks- well, seems like that makes the perfect Superbowl matchup... God, I'm glad now I can't see the SB live this year...


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: DevilsAdvocate25 on January 25, 2013, 03:47:26 PM
So why does everyone hate the Patriots anyway? Is it 'cause Brady is so dreamy?
My dislike is all about Bill Belichick. That guy is a cheater, a bully, and a sore loser.

Same here. I really had no opinion on the team until they got busted for cheating. You build a reputation as an elite team and win the big game and then its discovered that you cheated your way to it and, in my opinion, you should lose that reputation and respect. It's easy to make a decent team look elite when you already know what the other team is going to do and can gameplan for it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on January 25, 2013, 05:03:05 PM
You guys are nuts.  I haven't been this excited for a Superbowl in years!    :why_so_serious:

Honestly, I'm shocked - the Ravens have been wildly inconsistent this year and I really viewed them winning the AFC North more a reflection as to how shit-tastic a conference it was (the Steelers got old fast, though if the Front Office doesn't fuck it up in the draft, Cleveland really may be on the rise) than them being actual contenders. To turn around and then basically make this the exorcism tour of Colts, Manning, Patriots made it all the more absurd. But I guess a lot can happen when you solidify your O-line, get healthy in the post season, and fire the most predictable and bland OC ever.

From a Baltimore sports perspective, it has been an absolutely insane year (http://baltimore.orioles.mlb.com/bal/fan_forum/buckleup.jsp), and thank god we don't have basketball or hockey. Pitchers and catchers are reporting soon, and god do I need at least a little downtime away from sports.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on January 27, 2013, 10:06:13 AM
I love this super bowl.

I hate New England because of the fans. That's the only legit reason to hate most teams. Pat fans are only better than Eagles fans who were so fucking quiet this year it was delicious.

I love how people dislike the Harbaugh bros, fucking crazytalk again. Also Ray Lewis hate? Don't get me wrong all the god shit these days makes me really uncomfortable but if you can't respect him then you hate defense or something also he retired before it got too late. Good on him.

Compared to any super bowl involving the Atlanta Falcons who are arguably the most boring playoff team this year. Or one involving the fucking Patriots again. How the fuck are you guys complaining? I mean a Seahawks super bowl could have been fun (Carrol, Wilson, west coast, redemption for last time, crazy fans) but the Redskin's field made sure that was impossible. You guys couldn't have been pulling for Peyton and Elway could you? I don't get what you wanted. The only team more boring than the Falcons in the final 8 was arguably the Texans but Foster is kind of crazy in a fun way which is more than I can say about anyone on the Atlanta roster.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 27, 2013, 10:42:21 AM
I was rooting for a Packers/Broncos Super Bowl personally, but then I am a Packers fan, and I've always liked Peyton Manning. I have marginal interest in San Fran because of how long they sucked, I would root for the Falcons because they are a Southern team and I liked the Texans because of their underdog status. The Ravens can eat a dick.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 27, 2013, 12:23:25 PM
You guys couldn't have been pulling for Peyton and Elway could you? I don't get what you wanted.

Good QB play? That's what I was rooting for. I always want one marquee QB against a good defense in the Superbowl. Strength v. Strength.

Having Brady in it means you get to watch Brady lose again. Having Peyton in it has the advantage of a QB coming back from being cast aside by his long time franchise. Having Rodgers in it would mean you'd have the statistically best QB in the NFC. Having RG3 in it would mean the first black QB to make the Super Bowl since McNabb in 2005.

As it stands there are no marquee players on either side. You have a mid-year rookie v. a milquetoast boring QB playing over his head. You have a #10 rusher in Frank Gore. You have no top 10 receivers. Nobody on either defense is in the top 20 in sacks. Nobody is in the top 10 in picks.

It's a boring matchup. It's so boring they are talking about the coaches and an old ass guy who is retiring.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 27, 2013, 12:42:28 PM
Nobody on either defense is in the top 20 in sacks.
:headscratch:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Tannhauser on January 27, 2013, 01:26:51 PM
Rooted for Atlanta because they were the last southern team.  Boring?  The Falcons?  How many close games did they win?  You got yer Julio Jones, Roddy White, Turner and Matty Ice, WTF do you want, Steve Bartkowski to come back and blow his brains out at midfield?

I agree with the dancing monkey; boring matchup between two teams I loathe.  OK I respect the Niners, but the Ravens can fuck right off.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 27, 2013, 01:52:34 PM
Nobody on either defense is in the top 20 in sacks.
:headscratch:


I forgot about Aldon Smith. Probably because he hasn't had a sack since two weeks before Christmas.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 27, 2013, 02:09:29 PM
True, he misses a healthy Justin Smith.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 27, 2013, 09:30:20 PM
Also note on the black QB angle, Colin Kaepernick is as black as, say, our president.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on January 27, 2013, 10:13:22 PM
Rooted for Atlanta because they were the last southern team.  Boring?  The Falcons?  How many close games did they win?  You got yer Julio Jones, Roddy White, Turner and Matty Ice, WTF do you want, Steve Bartkowski to come back and blow his brains out at midfield?

I agree with the dancing monkey; boring matchup between two teams I loathe.  OK I respect the Niners, but the Ravens can fuck right off.

The Falcons were gifted a trip to the championship with a bye and getting a Seahawks team that proceeded to shoot their dick off and were down a huge player and they still should have won the game it felt like. A Falcons super bowl would have been awful. They are an awful southern dome team with no personality as far as I can tell and despite having talent they just have no team identity beyond they win close games somehow and nobody feels like they deserve it because they are bound to choke. Which they did.

If Paelos is complaining about not getting any top defensive talent in this super bowl I can only figure he's just full of shit. Which I already do so, not shocking at all.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 28, 2013, 06:21:55 AM
If Paelos is complaining about not getting any top defensive talent in this super bowl I can only figure he's just full of shit. Which I already do so, not shocking at all.

I complained about this Super Bowl having no marquee names on either side (especially at the offensive positions), other than an old ass linebacker who spouts random platitudes about how God favors him for some reason.

That's why it's turned into the storylines about the coaches, underdogs, QB change, blah blah blah. The NY Times blog sums up how they will beat these storylines to death. http://fifthdown.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/28/the-dozen-overdone-super-bowl-story-lines/


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Shannow on January 28, 2013, 06:56:12 AM
At times like this I find it convenient to remember that I was once a Niners fan.

Also the Ravens can lose for, if nothing else, screwing up everyone's Superbowl Challenge picks.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on January 28, 2013, 11:40:54 AM
It's slow and this is more interesting then the pro-bowl hangover and the other filler news. That said - whether you hate Brady and his team or not, the dude and his wife have a god damn moat! (http://offthebench.nbcsports.com/2013/01/25/yes-tom-bradys-new-20-mil-mansion-has-a-moat-why-would-you-think-it-wouldnt-video/)  :awesome_for_real: While I am disappointed there is no mention of a drawbridge, sharks, and/or burning oil defense systems, this is still pretty sweet.
(http://nbcoutofbounds.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/bradymoat.jpg?w=320)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 29, 2013, 09:22:34 AM
Things just got interesting. http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/baltimore-sports-blog/bal-ray-lewis-apparently-used-deer-antler-spray-to-help-fix-his-triceps-20130129,0,4888897.story?track=rss


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Trippy on January 29, 2013, 10:00:10 AM
He should've used magnets instead.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on January 29, 2013, 10:03:00 AM
What...

The...

Fuck????  :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: sickrubik on January 29, 2013, 10:18:59 AM
It contains IGF-1 which is banned in the NFL

Quote
The problem for Lewis is that the extract contains IGF-1, which is on the NFL’s list of banned substances.  For the NFL, the problem is that Lewis will retire after Sunday.  So there’s really nothing that can be done — unless Lewis admits to it on Tuesday and the league puts the investigative process into the highest gear possible. (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/01/29/ray-lewis-may-have-used-banned-substance-to-recover-from-torn-triceps/)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 29, 2013, 10:39:33 AM
I will become interested in these shenanigans when they start taking away titles and voiding wins from teams that play players who are cheating. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 29, 2013, 10:43:44 AM
You can blame the players association for blocking that. They are the ones trying hard to keep HGH testing out of the league.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on January 29, 2013, 11:41:51 AM
For easily the 5999th time since he came into the league- FUCK RAY LEWIS.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 29, 2013, 12:25:54 PM
Quote
rebuild your brain via your small intestines

Lets hope they don't rebuild the brain too much, otherwise you might regain sufficient faculties to see what utter bollocks this stuff is.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 29, 2013, 02:34:35 PM
You can blame the players association for blocking that. They are the ones trying hard to keep HGH testing out of the league.

I'm sure that the owners are putting up a stiff resistance.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: El Gallo on January 29, 2013, 08:22:26 PM
Anybody who thinks PEDs aren't widespread in the NFL is a fucking moron.  I don't think your average 60 year old white sportswriter hates Lewis nearly as much as they hated Bonds, so hopefully we'll be saved the years of self-righteous bullshit.  I can hope anyway.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 30, 2013, 04:37:08 AM
I am under the working assumption that any high level professional athlete (NFL, NBA, MLB, track and field, tennis, even golf) are on PEDs of some sort.  It's just the way pro sports work. 


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 30, 2013, 06:30:39 AM
Congress is starting to get pissy again too about the PED's in the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on January 30, 2013, 06:36:43 AM
Great use of tax dollars.  We can see how successful their efforts were in baseball.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: MrHat on January 30, 2013, 06:54:54 AM
I am under the working assumption that any high level professional athlete (NFL, NBA, MLB, track and field, tennis, even golf) are on PEDs of some sort.  It's just the way pro sports work.  

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Playmakers

(http://visiblesport.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/playmakers.jpeg)

Heh.  Canceled under pressure from the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 30, 2013, 09:00:28 AM
The Commish should suspend Ray for one game. Then have a press conference.

Commissioner Goodell why would you suspend a man on the eve of his retirement?

"Well I heard him often say that no weapon forged against him would prosper. I guess he never met..."

(http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_qYsD4xBz3-M/TFntn8YDfNI/AAAAAAAAEkI/LPzxEZhJMvA/s1600/Goodell+Blog+1.jpg)

"The Ginger Hammer"

(http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive/17705089/images/1327788136911.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on January 30, 2013, 09:02:23 AM
(https://dl.dropbox.com/u/82533/5rNXq50.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 30, 2013, 09:03:09 AM
 :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 30, 2013, 03:14:45 PM
http://deadspin.com/5979970/facebook-data-provides-the-most-accurate-nfl-fandom-map-ever-created

Neat map of fanbases via US county, based on facebook data.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on January 30, 2013, 09:06:14 PM
lol Jets

I'd be curious to see the breakdown for my home county. It broke for the Giants, but I knew a lot of Eagles fans too. Just curious how close it was!


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on January 30, 2013, 10:37:29 PM
I'd also like to see a version of that same map where they warp the proportions to fit the population (like they do with the redstate-bluestate maps sometimes).


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on January 31, 2013, 04:44:43 AM
NFL salaries by team and position (http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/interactive/2013/jan/30/nfl-salaries-team-position#baltimore-ravens,san-francisco-49ers)

A really cool widget from the Guardian.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on January 31, 2013, 04:58:48 AM
That's cool.  Interesting to see that there appears to be zero correlation between how much you spend, and your ability to make the playoffs.  At least, for this particular year.

Look at how cheap that Seattle defense is right now.  Surely that can't last.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on January 31, 2013, 06:45:37 AM
The salary cap keeps things interesting in the NFL.

Unlike baseball, where the dollar determines your chances for the most part.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on January 31, 2013, 11:18:33 AM
I think the salary cap has less to do with it than the fact that the playoffs let a lot of teams in and the games are all single elimination. (Which is not to say that the salary cap is not involved.)


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: K9 on February 03, 2013, 06:10:30 PM
The fuck is going on?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: luckton on February 03, 2013, 06:12:46 PM
The stadium is having Katrina flashbacks  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on February 03, 2013, 06:36:28 PM
I'm going to go ahead and go full conspiracy theory that somebody had money on the Niners and pulled the plug.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Chimpy on February 03, 2013, 06:41:14 PM
It's like some SF people hit up voodoo Stevie Wonder.  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on February 03, 2013, 07:35:37 PM
Eat so many dicks, Jim Harbaugh.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on February 03, 2013, 08:18:55 PM
Having no rooting interest, it was a very entertaining game.  I thought that on the 4th and goal from the 5, that Crabtree was obviously held and it felt a bit cheap that their last offensive play ended that way.   I know you can argue that Crabtree had his hands on him too, but it looked very clearly to me like he was being held and was trying to get away.  Games don't come down to one play at the end, so I don't think it cheapens the victory for the Ravens at all, just from a spectators point of view what had been an absolutely riveting last quarter and a half ended in a way that just wasn't particularly satisfying to me.

Nonetheless, great game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on February 03, 2013, 09:02:07 PM
There were also egregious missed holding calls on the TD return and the safety. That said, IMO Culliver lost us that game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on February 03, 2013, 09:08:28 PM
The Great Gay Conspiracy made Culliver play like shit, obvs.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: WayAbvPar on February 03, 2013, 09:33:38 PM
The Great Gay Conspiracy made Culliver play like shit, obvs.

 :Love_Letters:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on February 03, 2013, 09:52:30 PM
There were also egregious missed holding calls on the TD return and the safety. That said, IMO Culliver lost us that game.

A penalty on the safety doesn't get you any benefit.  Didn't see any holding on the return at all. 

Overlooked with the complaining about the hand jousting on the 4th down play was the fact that the ball was uncatchable in bounds.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Cyrrex on February 03, 2013, 11:08:09 PM
There were also egregious missed holding calls on the TD return and the safety. That said, IMO Culliver lost us that game.

A penalty on the safety doesn't get you any benefit.  Didn't see any holding on the return at all. 

Overlooked with the complaining about the hand jousting on the 4th down play was the fact that the ball was uncatchable in bounds.

I didn't see the play, and I may be downright wrong, but if it is a question of holding (before the ball is thrown), it doesn't matter if it is catchable or not.  That only comes into play if the ball is in the air (where it changes from a holding penalty to possible PI).  No?


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on February 03, 2013, 11:54:18 PM
Ball was definitely in the air. Any contact prior to Kap throwing the pass was within the 5 yard allowable space.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on February 04, 2013, 01:06:51 AM
There were also egregious missed holding calls on the TD return and the safety. That said, IMO Culliver lost us that game.

A penalty on the safety doesn't get you any benefit.  Didn't see any holding on the return at all.  

Overlooked with the complaining about the hand jousting on the 4th down play was the fact that the ball was uncatchable in bounds.

Bullshit ball was uncatchable, they haven't called it that way at all this season especially when the WR can't make any progress because he's being held completely up. That was holding on the defender and it got worse and worse looking every time they showed it. No idea about the penalty on the safety being of any benefit but it was blatantly obvious even live during the play and the guy staring it down didn't throw a flag. I didn't see anything wrong with the return either.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on February 04, 2013, 01:29:56 AM
On the return, there's a really clear view of it at ~1:00 in this YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoz66JyYu4Y Bruce Miller is just getting manhandled by 2 dudes.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Abagadro on February 04, 2013, 01:34:48 AM
Being manhandled doesn't make it holding. That block is all inside. No way that is holding.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on February 04, 2013, 01:38:12 AM
There's a guy standing behind him with his arms wrapped around him, I would have to disagree.

I don't think it changed the outcome in particular, in any case. Our defense has been shit since the 2nd half of the New England game and they've been getting away with a lot of mistakes - until tonight. Difference in the game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on February 04, 2013, 04:24:44 AM
 Completely bizarre game with what was looking to be a blowout and massive hug fest turning into such a complete clusterfuck of a game that my heart was about to explode from my chest in the 4th.

Still, I'm going to enjoy this offseason.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Jeff Kelly on February 04, 2013, 05:50:19 AM
The holding call doesn't matter since it wouldn't have stopped the clock. The clock only stops when the play is over.

The holding call would have resulted in a safety anyway and the call wouldn't have put any time back on the clock. So it helped run down the clock and also gave them a free kick. It was quite a brilliant last minute play actually.

Even if holding was called it would have been resolved after the play ended basically resulting in pretty much the same outcome.

The 49ers didn't lose because of a missed call, they lost because they let the Ravens get away with three TD passes that a defense that wasn't asleep should have prevented. They lost because they let a 109 kick off return happen in which Jones outmaneuvered the whole defensive line. They lost because of a preventable fumble and an interception.

All three TD in the first half were preventable if Culliver hadn't checked out during the first half and the ridiculous 56 yard pass wouldn't have led to a TD if one of the safeties had simply touched Jones. Then there was Moss who pretty much didn't catch any pass by the QB in the first half.

The only real WTF moment for me was the brawl after the interception in which the Ravens player who repeatedly punched one of the 49ers and shoved one of the officials should have been ejected but somehow wasn't. (Can't remember which Ravens player it was.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Malakili on February 04, 2013, 06:14:36 AM


Overlooked with the complaining about the hand jousting on the 4th down play was the fact that the ball was uncatchable in bounds.

No way that ball was uncatchable.  He got within a foot or two of it even WITH the holding.  Uncatchable is to be called if the QB throws it well out of bounds in a "throwing it away" type of pass, not when the ball lands out of bounds.  MANY passes which are caught would land out of bounds if no one touched the ball.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on February 04, 2013, 06:40:40 AM
Falcons fans are laughing hard at SF fans complaining about the lack of late holding calls.

Sucks doesn't it?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on February 04, 2013, 09:35:05 AM
Bullshit ball was uncatchable, they haven't called it that way at all this season especially when the WR can't make any progress because he's being held completely up. That was holding on the defender and it got worse and worse looking every time they showed it.

I have to believe the refs were told specifically to just not call shit on passing plays because all game they were basically hands off. Calls that would have been flagged REPEATEDLY all regular season were just fucking ignored. Hell, there was one play where Torrey Smith just fucking MUGGED a defender who clearly had position on him that didn't even get a second look. I truly believe the league office told the refs to "let them play" which is all well and good except that it's ABSOLUTELY not the way the game has been played up all season long. That infuriates the shit out of me, because it's a lack of consistency.

But really, I should have been entertained by the game but wasn't. Hell, I started fast-forwarding when Baltimore went up 28-6 and San Fran's offense was doing NOTHING in the 3rd quarter. I didn't start really watching again until San Fran got to 20 points. I just couldn't muster up one ounce of give a fuck about the game at all. I'm REALLY glad I didn't watch it live because I'd have just turned it off after 10 minutes of the stadium going dark.

And can everyone in the news media eat a dick and die for talking so much about the fucking Destiny's Child reunion? I didn't give two fucks about them when they were together, and I REALLY don't give two fucks now. Not even one fuck.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Merusk on February 04, 2013, 09:42:21 AM
I might give them a fuck. Or two.

Oh, and I made it all of 20 mins in to "lights out." Then Downton Abbey started and I said fuck this and let mom have the TV.



Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on February 04, 2013, 10:10:47 AM
Without the lights going bye-bye, SF was getting buried. Zero momentum, zero time to think, and on an emotional letdown from a 3 and out right off a kickoff TD.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: 01101010 on February 04, 2013, 11:11:40 AM
This is what happens when you bench Alex Smith.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sky on February 04, 2013, 11:13:31 AM
I have to believe the refs were told specifically to just not call shit on passing plays because all game they were basically hands off.
I had a feeling something was up when it was almost halftime and the announcer said "That's the first penalty of the game for the Ravens."

Both teams are better than they played last night.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on February 04, 2013, 11:15:06 AM
My offseason wish list:

- Get Culliver the fuck out of town
- Speed up the play calling at the line
- Draft: defense, defense, defense, defense, and more defense


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: DevilsAdvocate25 on February 04, 2013, 11:47:22 AM
I have to believe the refs were told specifically to just not call shit on passing plays because all game they were basically hands off.
I had a feeling something was up when it was almost halftime and the announcer said "That's the first penalty of the game for the Ravens."

Both teams are better than they played last night.

I knew something was up when the first play of the game was a 20 yarder that was called back on a penalty. 5 penalties for the Niners, 2 for the Ravens. I really got the feeling the refs were there to stop the momentum and that during the lights out, they were told to just stop calling anything unless it was egregious, like the roughing the kicker on Akers field goal.

I'm a niners fan and thought we got robbed throughout the game. I will admit that in many cases throughout the game the niners defense just looked lost and the offense seemed lazy sometimes. Like the niners fumble, where two other niners are standing there and just look at the ball on the ground while the Ravens guy swoops in and grabs it.

The missed tackles in the game by the niners were pretty bad too. Diving and grabbing instead of securing the tackle.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on February 04, 2013, 12:06:39 PM
My offseason wish list:

- Get Culliver the fuck out of town
- Speed up the play calling at the line
- Draft: defense, defense, defense, defense, and more defense

You could use a good second WR opposite Crabtree.  Relying on just Crabtree and Davis really limits the passing game.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on February 04, 2013, 12:08:14 PM
I have to believe the refs were told specifically to just not call shit on passing plays because all game they were basically hands off.
I had a feeling something was up when it was almost halftime and the announcer said "That's the first penalty of the game for the Ravens."

Both teams are better than they played last night.

I knew something was up when the first play of the game was a 20 yarder that was called back on a penalty. 5 penalties for the Niners, 2 for the Ravens. I really got the feeling the refs were there to stop the momentum and that during the lights out, they were told to just stop calling anything unless it was egregious, like the roughing the kicker on Akers field goal.

I'm a niners fan and thought we got robbed throughout the game. I will admit that in many cases throughout the game the niners defense just looked lost and the offense seemed lazy sometimes. Like the niners fumble, where two other niners are standing there and just look at the ball on the ground while the Ravens guy swoops in and grabs it.

The missed tackles in the game by the niners were pretty bad too. Diving and grabbing instead of securing the tackle.

 :uhrr:  You don't want a 20 yrder returned on a penalty, then fucking line up at the line of scrimmage correctly. That has fuckall to do with the refs and everything to do with not making stupid mistakes.  The 49'ers were not prepared mentally for the game in the first half and a lot of those penalties came from that.  They made the most of having damn near an hour to regroup and adjust, and you saw that in the second half.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on February 04, 2013, 12:09:10 PM
My offseason wish list:

- Get Culliver the fuck out of town
- Speed up the play calling at the line
- Draft: defense, defense, defense, defense, and more defense

You could use a good second WR opposite Crabtree.  Relying on just Crabtree and Davis really limits the passing game.

Well, I'm not completely ready to write off AJ Jenkins, another offseason of work and he may be ready next year. We also have Manningham signed for another year, he just needs to stay healthy.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on February 04, 2013, 12:14:20 PM
Manningham has consistently proven unable to stay healthy.

I think the Niners just believed their own hype, or at least the hype that came off that Green Bay win. They started slow in the Atlanta game and then the same way in this one.

And Goddamnit, now I have to say SUPER BOWL MVP JOE FLACCO every time I talk about what an arrogant, inconsistent douche Flacco is. You Ravens' fans are lucky. You got the good Flacco during the playoffs. I'm still not convinced he's as good of a QB as he thinks he is, but now he's got the ring to prove it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on February 04, 2013, 12:16:30 PM
Hell, you can have two rings and still be considered a marginal quarterback.  Just ask Eli Manning.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: JWIV on February 04, 2013, 12:19:16 PM
Manningham has consistently proven unable to stay healthy.

I think the Niners just believed their own hype, or at least the hype that came off that Green Bay win. They started slow in the Atlanta game and then the same way in this one.

And Goddamnit, now I have to say SUPER BOWL MVP JOE FLACCO every time I talk about what an arrogant, inconsistent douche Flacco is. You Ravens' fans are lucky. You got the good Flacco during the playoffs. I'm still not convinced he's as good of a QB as he thinks he is, but now he's got the ring to prove it.

We'll see. I can't imagine he's going to play this well in the regular season, but he's coming off basically a historic level postseason with his stats, so he's obviously better than he was at times this season. Changed O-Line obviously was a help, as was Cam Cameron being fired which moved the Ravens to a more balanced game plan and doing things like throwing into the middle of the field. There's also a the factor that Boldin basically is the unsung hero of the postseason and damn near caught any and everything thrown his way, which ends up making Flacco look better than he might be.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on February 04, 2013, 12:21:12 PM

Well, I'm not completely ready to write off AJ Jenkins, another offseason of work and he may be ready next year. We also have Manningham signed for another year, he just needs to stay healthy.

There's speculation the 49ers might cut Manningham for cap space anyway, given his injury problems.

I hadn't realized Jenkins was a first round pick, so maybe he'll work out.  Depending on cap space and price it might not be a bad idea to go after one of the free agent WRs, though.  If nothing else you'll need a slot WR.  If they have the money and cap space, imagine what another field stretcher like Mike Wallace or a safety blanket like Wes Welker could do for Kaepernick.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on February 04, 2013, 12:23:39 PM
I'm seriously loving the tears over 49er fans about calls. It's absolutely delicious.

The 49ers were a good team who couldn't do what got them to the playoffs when they arrived. Their pass rush was not there. Flacco was picking them apart. No amount of defense can save that.

By the way, Colin is a smart QB with a good arm. He's young and got rattled. He'll get better, and will be dangerous in that division for a while. The NFC West with Colin and Russell could be one of the better divisions to watch in the next 3 years. Nobody was going to be better than Flacco this post-season with the kind of protection he got. He proved against the best of the best, and came out on top. Hard to hate on the kid.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on February 04, 2013, 12:31:54 PM
I'm seriously loving the tears over 49er fans about calls. It's absolutely delicious.

Not as delicious as Falcons fans thinking that they got robbed by calls at all in that game or that anyone in the world would have been happy to see their shit team get demolished by the Ravens. Flacco would have looked better than Tom Brady against the Falcons "defense".

The Niners haven't been the same since Justin Smith got injured and Aldon Smith being nicked up in the playoffs didn't help either. Which is why in the playoffs they haven't won the way they won all season.

All in all it was a strange but entertaining game with such a huge swing, I don't mind the refs swallowing the whistles as it reminds me of playoff hockey where the league basically admits that the way they call the game in the regular season makes for a less enjoyable game so they break out real hockey for the playoffs. I can live with all the ticky tacky shit (including when Torey Smith mugged the db who was in position to drop an interception) not being called but the hold on 4th down was blatant as hell. The real story of that play though is that like what happened on the 2 point attempt and on at least one other play Kaepernick was out of time on the play clock and the Ravens just jumped the ever loving fuck out of the snap and blew the play to shit.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: ghost on February 04, 2013, 12:47:23 PM
I thought the game was boring as fuck for 85% of it.  It got a little tight at the end, but I don't think the game was ever really in doubt after the Ravens blew it up in the first half.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on February 04, 2013, 01:13:29 PM
It got a little tight at the end, but I don't think the game was ever really in doubt after the Ravens blew it up in the first half.

(https://dl.dropbox.com/u/82533/lionking-ehhh.gif)




Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sky on February 04, 2013, 01:27:15 PM
Oh, forgot to ask: Why is Randy Moss still in a uniform? Talk about phoning it in.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Nevermore on February 04, 2013, 01:37:45 PM
I only had two reasons for rooting for Baltimore over San Fransisco in this game: Jim "The Berserker" Harbaugh is annoying and the desire for Randy Moss to never get a ring.

That outweighed my dislike of Ray Lewis.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on February 04, 2013, 01:39:37 PM
Not as delicious as Falcons fans thinking that they got robbed by calls at all in that game or that anyone in the world would have been happy to see their shit team get demolished by the Ravens. Flacco would have looked better than Tom Brady against the Falcons "defense".

Nobody wanted the Falcons there, and unless you lived in SF not many really wanted them there either. The fans overwhelming wanted the Packers and Denver, but didn't get it. They recovered nicely by making it the MOST WATCHED SUPER BOWL EVAAAAAH

And next year will be even more people. It doesn't even matter anymore who's in it.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Sjofn on February 04, 2013, 06:26:47 PM
Hell, you can have two rings and still be considered a marginal quarterback.  Just ask Eli Manning.

Eli Manning is also not exactly Mr. Consistency, so ... Plus he has that face. Plus he is seriously just a dude. Just a regular ol' dude. He has anti-mystique, and people hate that in a quarterback. :P


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on February 07, 2013, 12:58:50 PM
Weird day.
-Greg Williams is reinstated and working for Tenn.
-Apparently Flacco wanted others (or was going to himself) to tackle Ginn Jr if he broke free down the Ravens sidelines in the Super Bowl. It's not like they could award the touchdown on a penalty, but how fucked up would this have been to see?
-And as if AP's return from a torn ACL was not awesome enough, he apparently had a sports hernia since week 10. Meaning that the year he miraculously returned from a knee injury which should have slowed him down at least a little, he also had what kept Greg Jennings out most of the year while AP had what would have statistically been two good seasons. One of those two good seasons alone was during the 5 games he played with the sports hernia while he ran for over 1k yards in weeks 11-16.  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Hoax on February 07, 2013, 01:02:13 PM
I like purple jesus but let's be real he's on something that if it isn't called a PED today will be called a PED in the future.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on February 07, 2013, 01:06:24 PM
Most likely, but PEDs or not - recoving from an ACL and having a sports hernia while coming less than 10 yards of a decades old record is pretty nuts.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on February 07, 2013, 02:55:39 PM
Most likely, but PEDs or not - recoving from an ACL and having a sports hernia while coming less than 10 yards of a decades old record is pretty nuts.

PED ain't going to stop the pain of a sports hernia. Maybe it made him a little stronger and faster, but it sure as fuck didn't make him not feel the fucking pain before, during and after the game. Motherfucker is a beast.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ingmar on February 07, 2013, 02:56:25 PM
Painkillers are PEDs by any sane definition for exactly that reason.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on February 07, 2013, 02:57:52 PM
Only not banned as such.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Paelos on February 07, 2013, 03:48:36 PM
Apparently Flacco wanted others (or was going to himself) to tackle Ginn Jr if he broke free down the Ravens sidelines in the Super Bowl. It's not like they could award the touchdown on a penalty, but how fucked up would this have been to see?

From what I understand of the rulebook, yes they could have awarded the touchdown if the referees believed he was unobstructed to the end zone, declared the game over, and handed the win to SF. If not, the commissioner would have the authority to reverse the game's outcome under Rule 17 Section 2, which covers extraordinarily unfair actions, in addition to suspending and fining Flacco, and taking draft position actions against the Ravens.

It would have been the most fucked up ending to a football game, let alone a Super Bowl, in the history of football.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Rasix on February 07, 2013, 03:52:56 PM
Any team that would do something like that on that stage would earn my eternal hatred.

I'm sure AP was doing enough pain killers at the end of the season to make Jason Taylor cringe.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Segoris on February 07, 2013, 04:09:26 PM
From what I understand of the rulebook, yes they could have awarded the touchdown if the referees believed he was unobstructed to the end zone, declared the game over, and handed the win to SF. If not, the commissioner would have the authority to reverse the game's outcome under Rule 17 Section 2, which covers extraordinarily unfair actions, in addition to suspending and fining Flacco, and taking draft position actions against the Ravens.

It would have been the most fucked up ending to a football game, let alone a Super Bowl, in the history of football.
I just read that, and while it is most likely they would have done just that it still would have been awesome to see. Just seeing the person who ended up as the MVP running on the field, without a helmet, to pull a Terry Tate on a mother fucker who broke free. Anyways, Video is found here (http://www.sbnation.com/2013/2/6/3962488/joe-flacco-ted-ginn-jr-audio-tackle-super-bowl), I prefer PFT's transcript (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/07/flacco-urged-teammates-on-sidelines-to-tackle-ted-ginn/) over Deadspin's (http://deadspin.com/5982436/joe-flacco-was-ready-to-leave-the-sideline-and-tackle-ted-ginn-on-the-super-bowls-last-play), so here's the quote:

For the painkillers -Jason Taylor would only be able to cringe if he wasn't still in a lull from his own habit :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: HaemishM on February 08, 2013, 08:22:23 AM
Anyways, Video is found here (http://www.sbnation.com/2013/2/6/3962488/joe-flacco-ted-ginn-jr-audio-tackle-super-bowl), I prefer PFT's transcript (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/07/flacco-urged-teammates-on-sidelines-to-tackle-ted-ginn/) over Deadspin's (http://deadspin.com/5982436/joe-flacco-was-ready-to-leave-the-sideline-and-tackle-ted-ginn-on-the-super-bowls-last-play), so here's the quote:

I...

Yep. I can't ever root for that motherfucker again. I already thought he was a complete water head, but what a fucking douche. I love that even his teammates were a bit  :ye_gods: over the thought of it. God, what a complete fucking cockgobbler.


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: Ginaz on February 08, 2013, 07:42:34 PM
I only had two reasons for rooting for Baltimore over San Fransisco in this game: Jim "The Berserker" Harbaugh is annoying and the desire for Randy Moss to never get a ring.

That outweighed my dislike of Ray Lewis.

Having a douche bag for a coach and another at wide receiver out weighs being involved in a double murder??? :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2012
Post by: El Gallo on February 08, 2013, 07:54:39 PM
edit: whoops, missed the whole last page.