Title: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 11, 2013, 08:58:53 AM Vick and Eagles sticking together for 2013/2014 season. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/301009585211334656)
Probably the best solution for the Eagles AND Vick. Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 11, 2013, 09:02:31 AM I wonder what kind of pay cut he took. Also, I'm shocked they didn't just move on to something else. He's never going to last all season.
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 11, 2013, 09:37:22 AM I wonder what kind of pay cut he took. Also, I'm shocked they didn't just move on to something else. He's never going to last all season. They don't really have many options that would be any better. Title: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on February 11, 2013, 09:43:22 AM I don't know.. he might last in Chip's system if it works out correctly.
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 11, 2013, 11:51:22 AM I don't know.. he might last in Chip's system if it works out correctly. I don't believe anymore in his ability to not do something stupid and get injured. He's missed a total of 20+ games in his career due to injuries. He's played 16 games once in his career. He hasn't played more than 13 games in a season since going to prison. On average Vick has been injured for 16% of his career when he was eligible. Throw in the time he missed for jail sentences, and Vick hasn't been able to play 31% of his possible career. Now he's 32, and all his numbers have been in steady decline since 2010, while he's fumbled more times in 2 years than he has in his last 4 seasons in Atlanta. Title: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 11, 2013, 12:09:03 PM But, again, what are their options at this point? There's really not going to be any free agents worth picking up that would be a better shot than Vick.
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on February 11, 2013, 12:30:00 PM I don't see a whole lotta interest in teams drafting Geno Smith... they might be able to grab him and have him watch what not to do for a year. No?
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 11, 2013, 12:30:15 PM I think Alex Smith would be cheaper and better.
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 11, 2013, 12:34:40 PM I think Alex Smith would be cheaper and better. We don't know the details on the deal with Vick, which is a restructured deal for one year, so that's possible to go either way. Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 11, 2013, 12:38:43 PM I'm hearing $10M as an early rumor.
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 11, 2013, 12:49:05 PM Which would put him right around the same pricetag as Smith's current contract is going to be. Though, contract shit gets stupid, of course.
But, if we just look at it from the standpoint of rebuilding and moving towards the future, why move from Vick to Smith and spend around the same amount of money, just to look towards the future with a new QB? Why NOT just stick with Vick? Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 11, 2013, 01:11:06 PM Because Smith has a better passer rating and has managed to post a 16 game season in the last 2 years?
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on February 11, 2013, 01:15:19 PM Because Smith has a better passer rating and has managed to post a 16 game season in the last 2 years? This. Unless they've pretty much given up on the season or think that Nick Foles really is there guy, I'd have gone with Smith. Or fucking Matt Flynn. Or a block of wood on wheels with stickem on it, since that's the only way they won't turn the ball over 2-4 times a game. And if the contract IS $10 million? Vick ain't sitting on the bench unless he REALLY blows in camp. Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on February 11, 2013, 01:19:33 PM Just as an FYI Harbaugh is currently talking like they want to keep Smith, so all that early talk about the 49ers granting him his release might have been premature.
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on February 11, 2013, 01:21:26 PM Because Smith has a better passer rating and has managed to post a 16 game season in the last 2 years? This. Unless they've pretty much given up on the season or think that Nick Foles really is there guy, I'd have gone with Smith. Or fucking Matt Flynn. Or a block of wood on wheels with stickem on it, since that's the only way they won't turn the ball over 2-4 times a game. And if the contract IS $10 million? Vick ain't sitting on the bench unless he REALLY blows in camp. But neither Smith nor Flynn are free agents, so the Eagles would have to give up draft picks to acquire either one. Since I doubt anyone in the Eagles organization is under the illusion they can compete for the Super Bowl this year, they're probably taking a longer view and expect they can do better than Smith/Flynn/Vick/Foles in '14. Fake Edit: the 49ers don't want to keep Smith, that's all just bluster to get a better draft pick for him in a trade. Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on February 11, 2013, 01:28:38 PM Local wishful thinking sports wharrgarbl is that we will trade him for Revis. :why_so_serious: (Or rather cut his salary to afford Revis, or whatever the complicated scenario with the 2 of them getting cut or not cut or whatever ends up being. In other words, nothing will happen.)
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 11, 2013, 01:30:41 PM Okay, I'm not endorsing Vick as a better player, but my point was what made more sense for the Eagles AND Vick at this point in both their careers.
As for Smith is going to get traded if he's not going to be on the Niners roster in 13/14. He has enough value that the Niners can get at least a draft pick out of him. Personally, I think Smith is a Niner for another year. Local wishful thinking sports wharrgarbl is that we will trade him for Revis. :why_so_serious: (Or rather cut his salary to afford Revis, or whatever the complicated scenario with the 2 of them getting cut or not cut or whatever ends up being. In other words, nothing will happen.) Last time Broncos and Niners were in the same trade/signing talks, who won? :why_so_serious: Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 11, 2013, 01:47:19 PM So instead of releasing Smith and using that $8M to upgrade their weapons for the real QB, they are intent on having the NFC West set records for MOST EXPENSE BACKUPS EVAAAAAAR!
Sorry, what's the downside in cutting him? You get nothing? You were $8M in the hole. The obsession with organizations trying to get something for guys we all know they are dumping drives me bananas. It's stupid sunk cost thinking, and the Eagles just doubled down with it. Title: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 11, 2013, 01:59:39 PM So instead of releasing Smith and using that $8M to upgrade their weapons for the real QB, they are intent on having the NFC West set records for MOST EXPENSE BACKUPS EVAAAAAAR! Sorry, what's the downside in cutting him? You get nothing? You were $8M in the hole. The obsession with organizations trying to get something for guys we all know they are dumping drives me bananas. It's stupid sunk cost thinking, and the Eagles just doubled down with it. Hey, I'm not saying it's necessarily the best option to not dump Smith, I just am not sure they are 100% sold on Kaep just yet, so why not keep Smith one more year, just in case? I would expect a restructuring to keep him there, and I think Smith does it. Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 11, 2013, 02:52:22 PM What's the advantage for him to restructure? There are 10 teams right now that have QBs who were total disasters, and Philly is on that list. Jacksonville, Tennessee, the Jets, Kansas City, Minnesota, Cleveland, Buffalo, Philly, Arizona, and Oakland.
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on February 11, 2013, 03:07:32 PM With the draft the way it is, there is no reason whatsoever for Alex Smith to take any sort of deal from the 49ers. He's not going to start unless Kap breaks something. There is such a market for mediocre QB's right now, not to mention QB's like Smith who might not light up the stage but at least won't turn the ball over. San Fran would be FOOLS not to trade him (same goes for Flynn in Seattle) because they would get at least 1 decent draft pick out of the deal, if not more. Sitting him for a year as a backup? His value would be seriously diminished after that and he'd then be competing against what might be a better draft class at the position.
Philly may not be the place to. They've obviously pissed away a lot of money the last two years and aren't close to playoff ready. Smith wouldn't take them over that hump, IMO. Hell, of that list Paelos had, I'm not sure any of those would be playoff contenders with Smith other than Minnesota (and then only because of AP). Title: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 11, 2013, 03:14:05 PM Smith likes the Niners organization, from everything I can tell. If the Niners are showing any signs of not totally trusting Kaep jsut yet, and you have a chance to beat him in the offseason, why wouldn't you stay in SF than any of those listed?
Plus even backup QBs get rings. :D Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 11, 2013, 03:23:30 PM Well for one thing, it makes no business sense.
For another thing, Jim Harbaugh is a fucking tool who threw him out with the garbage at the first good opportunity. Why would you want to deal with that nonsense? It's just another waiting game even if you do happen to beat out Colin. Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on February 11, 2013, 03:34:07 PM You'd think Smith would walk if he could. Getting replaced like that had to sting to a professional and like you said, there;s a lot of teams that would love to get him.
I've lost all faith in Vick. Maybe with Reid gone he'll magically turn around, but I'm not betting on it. I really liked him when he was playing for the Falcons. So fun to watch. Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 11, 2013, 03:34:37 PM Hell, of that list Paelos had, I'm not sure any of those would be playoff contenders with Smith other than Minnesota (and then only because of AP). KC's in a weak division with sooooo much offensive potential. Jamaal Charles is a great RB that nobody notices because he's on a shit team. Dwayne Bowe is a fantastic receiver. Dexter McCluster is a great young talent that needs a good QB to look at him. They have weapons. They have ability without a QB that works. They lack a defense. They have possibility the worst defensive line that took the field last year. They can't sack people, they can't stop the run, and they can't pressure. Their secondary might as well be playing two hand touch. Opposing passer rating was a 99.9 against them last year. That's one of the top 5 worst passing defenses of the last 3 years. Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on February 11, 2013, 03:44:43 PM Dwayne Bowe is a free agent and, if I remember correctly, has repeatedly said he wants out of KC. Tennessee or Minnesota would probably be the best places for him to land if the idea is to get into the playoffs immediately.
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on February 11, 2013, 03:46:09 PM Kansas City is the traditional destination for ex-49ers QBs, so there's that to consider as well. :why_so_serious:
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on February 11, 2013, 03:46:45 PM I don't see the Titans in the playoffs this year. They have weapons but they still kinda suck. :heartbreak:
Title: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 11, 2013, 03:59:52 PM Well for one thing, it makes no business sense. For another thing, Jim Harbaugh is a fucking tool who threw him out with the garbage at the first good opportunity. Why would you want to deal with that nonsense? It's just another waiting game even if you do happen to beat out Colin. But it would still be his best chance at a ring. Financial, probably would make more sense to go elsewhere, but I really don't know given the situation he was involved with in SF if he's going to get a lot of interest. Maybe I just like the kid enough to not want him in KC, okay? Especially if Flacco doesn't get franchise-tagged. which, of course, probably won't happen. The Ravens will make a deal with Flacco. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on February 11, 2013, 10:38:36 PM So the NFL is considering widening the field by about 35 feet, up to CFL standards. I'm not going to post a link. I don't like the idea, mainly because I think it leans everything even more to the offensive side than it already is.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on February 12, 2013, 12:15:33 AM Should make red zone offense a bit more interesting, if nothing else.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on February 12, 2013, 12:28:45 AM I would think it would just make it too easy. Defenders already have a hard enough time defending the flat and the corners in the Red Zone as it is. Not only will there be more space to create separation, but with all that extra space defenses will be forced to play softer to avoid giving up the huge plays all the time.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on February 12, 2013, 01:13:34 AM I would think it would just make it too easy. Defenders already have a hard enough time defending the flat and the corners in the Red Zone as it is. Not only will there be more space to create separation, but with all that extra space defenses will be forced to play softer to avoid giving up the huge plays all the time. Hmm, my feeling is that offense tends to dry up between the 15 and the 3 or so. I wouldn't be surprised if this is supposed to stop that. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on February 12, 2013, 01:28:00 AM I can see why you say that, I just feel that offense is already too easy. This will open it up both in the red zone AND the rest of the field, so presumably there will be more TD scoring plays (and big plays in general) from every spot on the field, not just the RZ. Points would go way up, and I think they are getting too high already.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 12, 2013, 06:25:17 AM This is a terrible idea. I don't want college basketball scores to become the norm in the NFL.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: taolurker on February 12, 2013, 06:42:53 AM With the injury protection issues and recent changes to kick-offs or hits on defenseless receivers this will not happen in the NFL. The speed of players (especially wide outs and DBs) with extra field width will increase the number of injuries.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 12, 2013, 07:21:54 AM The thought is that it would reduce injuries. Per, Polian, at least, there are less injury collisions in the CFL. (http://www.latimes.com/sports/sportsnow/la-sp-sn-nfl-wider-field-20130212,0,1748854.story)
I could see the arguments go either way on the risk of injuries, but I generally feel increasing the field size by what appears to be about 20% would make collisions less likely. However, I think it will fall flat, especially for now. It seems to me this would change the sidelines dramatically and a lot of stadiums may have to do some remodeling, I would think. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on February 12, 2013, 07:23:28 AM Vick and Eagles sticking together for 2013/2014 season. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/301009585211334656) Probably the best solution for Vick is done. Too many young QB's entering the league worth a risk and without the baggage. If I were the Eagles, I'd cut my losses and cut Vick. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on February 12, 2013, 08:21:48 AM And start who?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 12, 2013, 08:32:04 AM You know how you reduce injuries? Draconian drug testing measures on the players.
The average size of a linebacker on the BC Lions is about 224 pounds, and they had the most wins in the league. The average LB for the Broncos weighs 238 pounds, and in the case of a few of them they can run a sub 4.7 40 yard dash. A guy like Sean Weatherspoon is 244 pounds, and ran a 4.68 at the combine. That's insane. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sir T on February 12, 2013, 08:56:09 AM The amount of momentum Involved in a guy that heavy going at that kind of speed must be insane. No wonder people are getting hurt trying to stop them. And it must put a lot of strain on his skeleton to boot.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on February 12, 2013, 09:53:22 AM They could also force places like this:
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/WashingtonPost/Content/Blogs/dc-sports-bog/Images/Washington_Redskins--FedEx_Field_-FedEx%20Field.JPEG-01448.jpg?uuid=0TW7Hh9eEeGY1cmCFdeM9w) To not be so...painful. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on February 12, 2013, 02:30:26 PM Should make red zone offense a bit more interesting, if nothing else. Well if that is the goal, narrow the middle of the field if you widen the red zone. Make the field look like and hourglass on its side! YEAH! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on February 12, 2013, 02:31:45 PM Vick and Eagles sticking together for 2013/2014 season. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/301009585211334656) Probably the best solution for Vick is done. Too many young QB's entering the league worth a risk and without the baggage. If I were the Eagles, I'd cut my losses and cut Vick. Vick was good in 2011 when his O-line was healthy. Last year, they lost 3 starters. Worth giving him another shot. Foles is not up to it yet. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on February 12, 2013, 02:54:03 PM And start who? Anyone. The Eagles aren't going to be a Super Bowl contender for at least 6 years anyway. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 12, 2013, 03:34:45 PM Vick was good in 2011 when his O-line was healthy. Last year, they lost 3 starters. Worth giving him another shot. Foles is not up to it yet. There were varying factors to that, not just the line. Most of Vick's good games came in the latter half of the season, when A - they played no teams that would make the playoffs, and B - They had no shot at making the playoffs. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 12, 2013, 03:46:40 PM Neither of those really mean anything when the discussion is simply about the quality of his play.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 12, 2013, 04:16:42 PM He's not out there in a vacuum.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 12, 2013, 05:32:19 PM Well, exactly. No one does, so you can't just discredit any good play based on something like the reasons given. If he played well, he played well, regardless of the perceived quality of the opponent. I still am not quite sure what the fact that the Eagles were not going to go to the playoffs muddies is good play. I can somewhat buy point A, but not point B.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on February 12, 2013, 05:39:50 PM I wonder what kind of pay cut he took. Also, I'm shocked they didn't just move on to something else. He's never going to last all season. They don't really have many options that would be any better. Tebow. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 12, 2013, 05:44:21 PM The Eagles don't have Tebow.
Also Tebow is not better. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Fordel on February 12, 2013, 06:08:26 PM Is the field size thing like a legitimate possibility, or just the league spit-balling random shit?
That would be fucking weird, wide field without the extra dude. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on February 12, 2013, 06:08:56 PM The Eagles don't have Tebow. Also Tebow is not better. I like how serious you are. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on February 12, 2013, 06:09:07 PM The one they should really widen is the NBA.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 12, 2013, 06:21:14 PM The Eagles don't have Tebow. Also Tebow is not better. I like how serious you are. You don't fucking joke about Tebow with a Broncos fan. I WILL CUT YOU. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on February 12, 2013, 06:41:40 PM Look at it this way - can he be any worse than Vic?
:heart: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 12, 2013, 07:05:53 PM The one they should really widen is the NBA. Send in Kobe. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on February 12, 2013, 07:56:53 PM Look at it this way - can he be any worse than Vic? :heart: Yes. Of course, the Philly fans would likely lynch his ass 3 games into the season. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 12, 2013, 07:58:11 PM Philly fans take all the fun out of watching them be miserable because they are always miserable.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on February 12, 2013, 10:39:37 PM No, it's still enjoyable. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 15, 2013, 01:28:41 PM So, speaking of miserable failures, Titus Young was waived by the Rams after 9 days.
:awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on February 15, 2013, 01:56:09 PM So, speaking of miserable failures, Titus Young was waived by the Rams after 9 days. :awesome_for_real: Holy fuck. He didn't even make it to fucking OTA's? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 15, 2013, 02:48:26 PM I can't believe I ever thought that guy was going to be good. What a fucking idiot.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on February 15, 2013, 04:58:14 PM According to Jeff Fisher, they got him so they could do some more background checks and interviews on him. They got him because they wanted to spend some extended time with him. After that, they decided he was "not the best option."
What kind of walking fucking trashcan fire do you have to be to get shitcanned before you even get out of the interview process? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on February 15, 2013, 07:09:47 PM Especially with his obvious talent.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on February 21, 2013, 02:51:51 PM Josh Brent should be fucking executed just for this. What a turdball.
http://espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/story/_/id/8972120/josh-brent-drove-least-110-mph-time-crash-killed-jerry-brown-according-report (http://espn.go.com/dallas/nfl/story/_/id/8972120/josh-brent-drove-least-110-mph-time-crash-killed-jerry-brown-according-report) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on February 25, 2013, 01:56:41 PM T'eo runs a 4.82 in the 40. :awesome_for_real:
Seriously, anybody that drafts this clown may be in for a big surprise. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 25, 2013, 02:01:48 PM You'd think watching him absolutely struggle against the only team with NFL caliber linemen would have been the first tipping point.
Then it turns out he's a gullible idiot or possible lying closet case. Then he's slow. I'm going to put the over/under draft position at 70. He's a third round guy in my mind. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on February 25, 2013, 02:12:28 PM There is nothing in his stats to make up for the potential personal disaster. He won't be a third round gem so just let someone else take him. He probably slips to triple digits.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 25, 2013, 02:13:51 PM So you're going over then. I'm thinking under. Too many people are in need of linebacking talent to let him get too far into the third.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on February 25, 2013, 02:15:12 PM He looked small and lost in that national title game. That's all I really needed to see. Jon Harbaugh's reaction to his running was priceless.
I still think someone takes a shot on him late round one or early round 2. I hope they're not dumb enough to give him a green room spot. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on February 25, 2013, 02:41:02 PM He looked small and lost in that national title game. That's all I really needed to see. Jon Harbaugh's reaction to his running was priceless. I still think someone takes a shot on him late round one or early round 2. I hope they're not dumb enough to give him a green room spot. I'd say the Raiders if it wasn't for the 40 time. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on February 25, 2013, 02:56:24 PM Al Davis isn't drafting anymore so speed might not be an issue. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on February 25, 2013, 03:26:12 PM Al Davis isn't drafting anymore so speed might not be an issue. :why_so_serious: He is pretty fast himself these days what with the wings and everything. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on February 25, 2013, 03:44:35 PM So you're going over then. I'm thinking under. Too many people are in need of linebacking talent to let him get too far into the third. He's slow and small. Maybe if he puts on weight (and doesn't get even slower) he can play on rushing downs as a middle linebacker on a 3-4 defense. How many teams have need at that position?Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on February 25, 2013, 04:04:10 PM Keep an eye on Terron Armstead. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8_1n6Y4l74)
A 300 lb guy running a sub 4.7s 40yd. That's insane. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 27, 2013, 11:07:28 AM Alex Smith traded to the Chiefs for 2nd round pick and conditional mid-round pick in 2014.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on February 27, 2013, 11:13:35 AM And tradition is maintained.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on February 27, 2013, 11:17:30 AM Alex Smith traded to the Chiefs for 2nd round pick and conditional mid-round pick in 2014. I think this was an excellent deal for the Chiefs, particularly if they can draft a quality WR. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on February 27, 2013, 11:19:09 AM You know the Chiefs will draft a QB and make it a competition, and then Alex Smith will fucking snap.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on February 27, 2013, 11:21:46 AM If they draft Matt Scott, you will be able to hear my cackling from outer space.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on February 27, 2013, 11:41:38 AM And minutes later "Matt Cassel on the Cardinals' radar"
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on February 27, 2013, 11:51:09 AM And minutes later "Matt Cassel on the Cardinals' radar" Good, he's total fail. That will fit in nicely with the culture they are breeding over there. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on February 27, 2013, 11:51:15 AM Cassel is going to be a backup no matter where he goes. His stock has just fallen off the fucking cliff. Two years ago, the notion that you'd be replaced by Alex Smith at QB anywhere would have been laughable. Andy Reid may be one of the few guys that could utilize him effectively even without the level of talent he had in San Fran. KC has offensive talent (not as much as San Fran) even if they don't keep Bowe. The Cardinals might sign him but if they do, it'll be because they've decided to go with Kolb at starter. I'm not convinced they'll do that. Of course, they NEED to draft the shit out of some O-line that can actually play, because that's been one of their biggest problems going back to the Dennis Green days.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Stewie on February 27, 2013, 11:51:20 AM I don't know that Alex will succeed in KC. They may lose Bowe unless they franchise him and then that will probably just make him all pissy.
Also Alex wont have the benefit of the QB whisperer that he had in San Fran. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on February 28, 2013, 01:18:49 AM I kinda hope he succeeds, because he seems like a nice guy. But I don't think he will. I don't think that team is good enough for a QB who is essentially no better than a game manager. I think they need a gunslinger type QB, something to blow some damn life into them. KC seems to be cursed lately.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on February 28, 2013, 07:11:07 AM Denver seemed to do pretty well with a game manager. Granted, it was an exceptional one.
I think that Alex can do well if they build a decent team. He'll just have to carry more weight now that he's not being backed up by one of the best defenses in the league. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on February 28, 2013, 09:07:21 AM I hope Smith does well, and don't think it's as grim on the offensive side as it may seem. Their starting o-line is not that bad, they were just injured last year and their backups did not play well (I'd say middle of the pack even with injuries). They have a good #1 if Bowe gets the sand out of his vag. They have a phenominal running back in Charles, who is arguably the second best back in the league right now behind AP (based on what he had to work with).
Their defense on the other hand is awful. For comparison, they giving up almost as many yards as Atl while allowing roughly 10 more ppg. KC had a combined 13 takeaways with a -24 differential in turnovers. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on March 01, 2013, 08:01:50 AM I don't know that Alex will succeed in KC. They may lose Bowe unless they franchise him and then that will probably just make him all pissy. Also Alex wont have the benefit of the QB whisperer that he had in San Fran. Smith had a good season in 2011-12 and I was never able to figure out why he just seemed to click that year. He will quickly disappear into the crowded world of bitter back-up QBs. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 01, 2013, 12:08:29 PM Smith does one thing that Cassel could not do this past year - he protects the football. I mean, his combined INT totals from the last two years (10) were less than Cassel's from this past year (12) and Cassel didn't even play a full season. He was a fucking trainwreck. Just cutting down on the turnovers will make the KC defense better for having fewer short fields to work with.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 01, 2013, 12:39:24 PM It would be a good start, definitely, but it was not just the short field being an issue. The KC defense gave up way too many yards on too few of plays (3rd fewest) ending up tied for 4th worst in yards per play given up even with their short fields. Them being 8th worst in points allowed speaks a lot of the short fields, but the yards per play should have been lowered if that was the bigger issue.
To their credit, their defense is pretty disciplined (or stopped giving a fuck a long time ago, which is quite likely) being the 3rd least penalized. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on March 07, 2013, 03:43:43 PM http://deadspin.com/5989287/im-better-at-life-than-you-richard-sherman-craps-all-over-skip-bayless-on-first-take?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebook&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow
If everyone shit on Skip Bayless like that I might actually watch ESPN again. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 07, 2013, 05:25:34 PM ESPN beyond just watching games has become totally worthless to me. If there's a game? Great, but I don't even watch Sportscenter anymore since all they do is try to promote their own shit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on March 07, 2013, 05:50:34 PM Sportscenter isn't watchable outside of football season. It's just beyond bad right now.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 07, 2013, 05:53:19 PM Oh and watching college ball has become a game of russian roulette that I might draw Dicky V in a matchup I care about, at which point I am forced to turn it off.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on March 07, 2013, 06:23:53 PM Are you SERWIOUS!?! :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on March 07, 2013, 06:29:32 PM Annoying catch phrase, babeeeee!!!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 08, 2013, 07:54:05 AM http://deadspin.com/5989287/im-better-at-life-than-you-richard-sherman-craps-all-over-skip-bayless-on-first-take?utm_campaign=socialflow_deadspin_facebook&utm_source=deadspin_facebook&utm_medium=socialflow If everyone shit on Skip Bayless like that I might actually watch ESPN again. God I so hate Skip Bayless. He is such a fucking dickbag. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on March 08, 2013, 07:59:02 AM I don't understand the passion over Bayless. He clearly just says outrageous things to drum up interest and drama to boost ratings. Apparently it is working.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 08, 2013, 08:00:12 AM It's beyond that because I really try to avoid him whenever possible. The stuff he says is just so PATENTLY idiotic that he makes Steven R. Smith look sane and intelligent. In a rational world, that should never fucking happen.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 11, 2013, 10:05:35 AM https://twitter.com/JayGlazer/status/311160128743280640
Quote The Seahawks and Vikings have agreed to a trade that send Harvin to Seattle for draft picks, pending Harvin passing a physical And like that, Seattle gets STRONGER. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on March 11, 2013, 10:18:36 AM Until he sits out half the season with migraines.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on March 11, 2013, 10:51:29 AM James "the Hitman" Harrison (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9034415/james-harrison-released-pittsburgh-steelers) is looking for a new home.
The tears in this town are soooo satisfying. :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on March 11, 2013, 11:32:06 AM Until he sits out half the season with migraines. Also bet Golden Tate is going to turn into pure cancer off of this. He was just looking for an excuse because he is a complete shithead. Yes I know him personally and this has nothing to do with the fact that fuck Notre Dame. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 11, 2013, 11:32:19 AM I was really hoping Minnesota wouldn't trade Harvin because they'll probably replace him with someone who can be on the field for 16 games. :why_so_serious:
That Seattle team is looking pretty scary good now. How the fuck did the NFC West become a division worth watching? EDIT: Also yes Golden Tate is going to be a whiney bitchnugget for the next season. Not like he has enough talent to care if he gets benched. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on March 11, 2013, 12:46:17 PM Until he sits out half the season with migraines. Also bet Golden Tate is going to turn into pure cancer off of this. He was just looking for an excuse because he is a complete shithead. Yes I know him personally and this has nothing to do with the fact that fuck Notre Dame. I wonder if Harvin will take a bit less money from Seattle to live somewhere with legal pot? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on March 11, 2013, 01:02:13 PM Wouldn't it still be a banned substance in the NFL regardless of whether it's legal or not in Washington?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 11, 2013, 01:26:02 PM https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/311208271400812544
Quote As @RavensInsider insider reported, WR Anquan Boldin traded to 49ers for a sixth-round pick. WRs piling up in NFC West. a SIXTH. Wow. Apparently the NFC West is forming some sort of WR Voltron today. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 11, 2013, 02:09:21 PM I... what... the... fuck?????? :ye_gods:
Jesus Christ. I know Boldin didn't want to back off his salary number but a fucking sixth rounder? Jesus Christ. You just made the Super Bowl loser into the strongest goddamn team in the NFC and you got FUCKALL for it. With all the picks the 49ers have, the Ravens could only finagle a 6th rounder? Is the Ravens' GM some kind of complete idiot? First they give Flacco the highest paid contract in the league, then trade away one of the best possession receivers in the game? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on March 11, 2013, 02:20:35 PM He is older than dirt.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 11, 2013, 02:27:37 PM Age 32. Same age as Greg Jennings without Jennings recent injury history. Oh and his salary is only $6 million or so this year. It's a goddamn steal since the Niners still have 14 draft picks with which to build depth.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on March 11, 2013, 02:28:18 PM You seriously think that's a bad trade for the Niners? Someone call the Baltimore PD, because the Ravens just got swindled.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on March 11, 2013, 02:29:31 PM I... what... the... fuck?????? :ye_gods: Jesus Christ. I know Boldin didn't want to back off his salary number but a fucking sixth rounder? Jesus Christ. You just made the Super Bowl loser into the strongest goddamn team in the NFC and you got FUCKALL for it. With all the picks the 49ers have, the Ravens could only finagle a 6th rounder? Is the Ravens' GM some kind of complete idiot? First they give Flacco the highest paid contract in the league, then trade away one of the best possession receivers in the game? They were going to cut him. They're lucky to get anything at all. Baltimore was not "swindled" - they got something when a few hours ago they were going to get nothing - and I have real questions about whether the improvement we get from Boldin at this age is really going to be worth 6 million dollars of cap space. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 11, 2013, 02:38:13 PM Well, he's only signed for this year I think so it won't cost them that much if it doesn't work out. I don't even expect improvement, I expect his numbers to go down because he'll have 2 other receivers (Davis and Crabtree) to take touches away. He'll be an improvement over Randy Moss and it cost the Niners almost nothing.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on March 11, 2013, 02:38:40 PM Dude had 145 yards and a TD against the Colts last year. He has 35 receptions for 571 yards and four touchdowns in eight career post-season games.
TAKE THE GIFT. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on March 11, 2013, 02:44:25 PM I... what... the... fuck?????? :ye_gods: Getting Bouldin will help but it'll take somebody like Revis (assuming he's recovered from his injury) to really upgrade the Niners.Jesus Christ. I know Boldin didn't want to back off his salary number but a fucking sixth rounder? Jesus Christ. You just made the Super Bowl loser into the strongest goddamn team in the NFC and you got FUCKALL for it. With all the picks the 49ers have, the Ravens could only finagle a 6th rounder? Is the Ravens' GM some kind of complete idiot? First they give Flacco the highest paid contract in the league, then trade away one of the best possession receivers in the game? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on March 11, 2013, 03:48:36 PM I hope Revis doesn't go to the 49ers. Not so much that he will make them better (although he probably would), but Revis and Sherman will NEVER. SHUT. THE. FUCK. UP. if they have to play each other at least twice a year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 11, 2013, 04:31:43 PM When the fuck were the NFC west teams allowed to be real teams again? I thought 2012 was a fluke, but this is setting up some long term competition here.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on March 11, 2013, 09:00:43 PM Age 32. Same age as Greg Jennings without Jennings recent injury history. Oh and his salary is only $6 million or so this year. It's a goddamn steal since the Niners still have 14 draft picks with which to build depth. Jennings is only 29. Still ridiculous for a 6th rounder. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on March 11, 2013, 11:23:03 PM Boldin is a monster. That was highway robbery.
And Percy Harvin is one of the most talented and dangerous guys in the NFL. Even if you only get 12 games out of him, he's probably going to be worth the price. It is too bad Tate is such a douchebucket, because he is sort of a poor man's Percy Harvin, and the two of them together could pose nightmares for defenses. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on March 12, 2013, 02:39:52 AM That was highway robbery. No, it really, really wasn't. They were going to cut him anyway. The 49ers just paid a little price for the privilege of not having to bid against other clubs. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: JWIV on March 12, 2013, 02:53:18 AM Ingmar pretty much nailed it. Q was going to be cut and the Ravens would have gotten nothing. Don't get me wrong, it sucks to lose him - he was a very large reason why the Ravens got through the playoffs, let alone winning a ring, but the Ravens are seriously hurting under the salary cap (just wait for the screams of anguish when Ed Reed signs with another team this year).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 12, 2013, 07:53:30 AM Oh damn, Ed Reed may be going to the 49ers as well.
Boldin is a monster. That was highway robbery. And Percy Harvin is one of the most talented and dangerous guys in the NFL. Even if you only get 12 games out of him, he's probably going to be worth the price. It is too bad Tate is such a douchebucket, because he is sort of a poor man's Percy Harvin, and the two of them together could pose nightmares for defenses. As dangerous and talented as the double-edged locker-room poison named Percy Harvin is, getting half a season worth of games out of him is not worth Vincent Jackson or Dwayne Bowe level of money with his $10-13million per year expense. I feel kind of dirty agreeing with Chris Carter, but when the Vikings are 5-2 without Harvin in the last 7 games of the season and now can build some depth with 3 picks, they are probably better off. Especially if they can snag Wallace out from under Miami while also getting 3 picks. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on March 12, 2013, 08:55:25 AM That was highway robbery. No, it really, really wasn't. They were going to cut him anyway. The 49ers just paid a little price for the privilege of not having to bid against other clubs. You are right, I picked the wrong words. My disbelief probably more stems from the fact that they were going to cut him in the first place. Fucking why? You have cap issues and your solution is to make Joe Flacco the richest man in the league while releasing Boldin? This team becomes noticeably worse without Boldin on the roster. He is a stud. As far as Ed Reed goes, I don't think he has much left in him, but we'll see. I'd love to see the 49ers take him if it somehow meant they couldn't also get Revis (no idea if that would be the case). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2013, 09:54:09 AM That was highway robbery. No, it really, really wasn't. They were going to cut him anyway. The 49ers just paid a little price for the privilege of not having to bid against other clubs. You are right, I picked the wrong words. My disbelief probably more stems from the fact that they were going to cut him in the first place. Fucking why? You have cap issues and your solution is to make Joe Flacco the richest man in the league while releasing Boldin? This team becomes noticeably worse without Boldin on the roster. He is a stud. As far as Ed Reed goes, I don't think he has much left in him, but we'll see. I'd love to see the 49ers take him if it somehow meant they couldn't also get Revis (no idea if that would be the case). Niners don't have a lot of room, I don't know how likely it's going to be that they would get Revis. The whole reason they would be interested in Reed is because they're ver likely losing Goldson. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on March 12, 2013, 10:04:15 AM They could fit Revis in if they didn't give him a new contract (i.e. it would be a one year thing). Given how temperamental he is, though, he's unlikely to play very well without one.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2013, 10:06:06 AM They could fit Revis in if they didn't give him a new contract (i.e. it would be a one year thing). Given how temperamental he is, though, he's unlikely to play very well without one. Revis is going to come in the mid tens for contract. The Niners have next to no cap room currently. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 12, 2013, 10:07:27 AM Falcons are pitching Tony Gonzalez to come back for like $7M, because the Falcons are stupid and don't want a defense that works.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on March 12, 2013, 10:12:40 AM They could fit Revis in if they didn't give him a new contract (i.e. it would be a one year thing). Given how temperamental he is, though, he's unlikely to play very well without one. Revis is going to come in the mid tens for contract. The Niners have next to no cap room currently.Edit: reworded Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2013, 10:34:40 AM Revis is not signing a one year $6 million dollar deal. He wants a big payday, and will likely get it. (Somewhere in the $15m/year.) Alex Smith with save $7m for the 2013 cap.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on March 12, 2013, 10:55:16 AM He can't void his contract until 2014. If he's traded the other team doesn't have to give him a new contract. If he doesn't get a new contract the choices are then either to sit out the season or play for his 2013 contract price of $6 million.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2013, 11:05:32 AM He can't void his contract until 2014. If he's traded the other team doesn't have to give him a new contract. If he doesn't get a new contract the choices are then either to sit out the season or play for his 2013 contract price of $6 million. Yes, I understand that, but I'm hinging on the fact that he doesn't want a one year contract. He wants a big contract. Both sides have to sign that contract. It's not going to be a one and done, considering the picks traded will be higher than a 6th. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 12, 2013, 11:05:44 AM That was highway robbery. No, it really, really wasn't. They were going to cut him anyway. The 49ers just paid a little price for the privilege of not having to bid against other clubs. So they got a penny instead of nothing. BRA-VO. Also, heard a fun stat this morning. Flacco's completion percentage when throwing to Boldin - 62%. Completion percentage when throwing to EVERY OTHER RECEIVER on the team - 48%. Holy God but Ravens' fans are going to be screaming about Flacco's big-money contract next year and I'm going to be loving it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2013, 11:42:52 AM Vikings just released Winfield. (https://twitter.com/TomPelissero/status/311543275796443136)
So, that should eliminate some possible suitors for Revis. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 12, 2013, 12:11:35 PM So they got a penny instead of nothing. BRA-VO. Also, heard a fun stat this morning. Flacco's completion percentage when throwing to Boldin - 62%. Completion percentage when throwing to EVERY OTHER RECEIVER on the team - 48%. Holy God but Ravens' fans are going to be screaming about Flacco's big-money contract next year and I'm going to be loving it. That penny is more like a scratch-off lotto ticket, and is still better than nothing. Additionally, it keeps Q out of the division. Though yes, the big issue here is Flacco's contract and whether or not he's worth it considering everything they have to give up for keeping him. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2013, 12:48:28 PM ..and now Nnamdi Asomugha released (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/311561457483542528).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 12, 2013, 12:52:42 PM Winfield surprised me. Asomugha didn't. He made way too much money for the production he gave Philly. He'll get picked up and overpaid somewhere else, but he better hope it's a system that fits him.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2013, 02:00:02 PM Out of nowhere, my Broncos get some much needed help on the OL and steal Vasquez from the Chargers (https://twitter.com/MikeGarafolo/status/311578315150467072). Strengthen your team while weakening a divisional rival? SOLD.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2013, 03:04:02 PM Apparently the Ravens don't have any LBs anymore. (https://twitter.com/RavensInsider/status/311595454632714241)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on March 12, 2013, 03:05:40 PM It's ok. They have Flacco. :ye_gods:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 12, 2013, 03:38:58 PM The Ravens won a Superbowl with old assets. If you thought they weren't going to immediately cut bait with contracts to pay their bloated QB gamble/blunder contract, you were crazy.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on March 12, 2013, 03:52:01 PM Additionally, it keeps Q out of the division. Very good point. All three teams could have room for him. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2013, 03:55:49 PM The Ravens won a Superbowl with old assets. If you thought they weren't going to immediately cut bait with contracts to pay their bloated QB gamble/blunder contract, you were crazy. Yes, but it doesn't mean you can't look at it and go "lol". Christ. and the shopping spree by Miami today has it's first victim. Karlos Dansby. Good money on him ending up in Baltimore, I imagine. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 12, 2013, 06:06:57 PM Oh I agree it's stupid, but the cap limit as it stands right now is stupid. $123M for the most popular sport in the US for 53 guys? It's absurd. The cap has barely moved while the NFL has been raking in new revenues.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on March 12, 2013, 06:12:51 PM Yes, they are headed towards labor problems if they don't account for their new revenue sources in the cap *soon*.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: JWIV on March 12, 2013, 07:16:32 PM Miami and Cleveland both seem to be backing up the Brinks truck to M&T Stadium today. 30+ Million dollars a piece for a situational pass rusher (Kruger) and a linebacker with durability issues (Ellerbe) is pretty :uhrr:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 12, 2013, 07:33:31 PM Oh I agree it's stupid, but the cap limit as it stands right now is stupid. $123M for the most popular sport in the US for 53 guys? It's absurd. The cap has barely moved while the NFL has been raking in new revenues. Indeed. Not sure we are in disagreement. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on March 12, 2013, 08:47:06 PM I'm still laughing at the contract Flacco got. (http://www.theonion.com/articles/value-of-us-dollar-plummets-after-joe-flacco-signs,31571/)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on March 12, 2013, 11:13:04 PM LOL Onion
Quote “Flacco just chucks every ball up for grabs and lucks out whenever his receivers catch one of his shitty throws,” added Krueger. “No wonder my pack of gum cost $850 yesterday.” and Quote At press time, the Green Bay Packers were reportedly finalizing a six-year, $989 trillion deal with quarterback Aaron Rodgers. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2013, 07:29:46 AM Ravens continue to bleed, losing Bernard Pollard. (https://twitter.com/Crushboy31/status/311844036031946753)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 13, 2013, 08:23:54 AM Holy fuck. The Ravens appear to be completely dismantling what won them the Super Bowl in the first place. I mean, I expected them to lose some pieces but shit. They have like 2 linebackers left, they haven't signed Ed Red and are releasing their other safety, got rid of their best receiver by a mile. It really is rebuilding time in Baltimore. Maybe they think this draft really is stocked with defensive talent, but I don't think they have enough draft picks to make up for it.
With the Steelers crumbling under age, injury and cap pressure and the Ravens apparently doing the same thing, does that make Cinci-fucking-nnatti the favorite to win that division? I mean... CLEVELAND could be good this year with 6 games against teams that are probably at best mediocre now. Has the AFC North become the new NFC West? Miami has spent but they got specific pieces that could help them a lot. Wallace gives them a credible deep threat receiver to augment Hartline over the middle, they got pass rush with the linebackers and their defense was already decent. The loss of Reggie Bush may be a concern but with the Jets guaranteed to suck and Buffalo's crappy D and INT-happy QB, they may certainly be in for a wild card this year. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 13, 2013, 08:45:55 AM I think Baltimore is an indictator of what life will be like under the new cap. The second you win a Super Bowl, the QB gets paid, and the rest of the team gets dismantled to start over. The idea of "dynasties" occuring in a tight salary cap league anymore is laughable. The last dynasty we saw was the 2001-2004 Patriots. The reason was that the salary cap moved from $67m at the beginning of that dynasty to $80m at it's conclusion. That's over 16% in those 4 years.
You know how much the cap has moved since 2009? 0% Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 13, 2013, 09:29:41 AM The salary cap seems like it's a poison pill the owners inserted in the CBA to get salaries down, only they forgot to tell themselves. The amount of cap juggling that is being done is getting ridiculous.
Ryan Fitzpatrick released by the Bills (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000150173/article/ryan-fitzpatrick-it-stinks-to-be-cut-by-buffalo-bills). Ok, so he was a turnover machine (22 in all). And he was WAY overpaid on the basis of a good first half of the 2011 season. But their next best option which they re-signed is TAVARIS FUCKING JACKSON. Really? That's not even a sidegrade, that's a complete downgrade. And they want to hold an open competition for QB. So the Jets and Bills have pretty much ceded the East to the Pats and Dolphins then. All righty. Maybe they'll trade for Matt Flynn because that seems like the only option out there worth exploring. With no rookie QB can't miss prospect out there, you likely aren't getting a starter there. With all the money they pissed away on defense last year, they kind of have to give it a go this year but I don't see how they are going to be that competitive. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 13, 2013, 09:32:09 AM Yeah, Bal is seemingly fucked. They have Smith and Jones left for WR. I mostly like both of them, but they are not enough to carry Flacco or make his salary seem less dumb. They did pick up Chris Canty, and that is okay but it is a piece of tape on a broken damn.
Mia is spending, a little too much for the talent imo, but they are doing something in free agency they haven't done in a while - guaranteeing they land some long overdue talent. The Browns are improving their defense (beyond just Kruger), and may lose Cribbs. If NE picks up Cribbs, that would either drive down Welker's price if he really wants to stay, or he could become the top free agent immediately. His news has been quiet while trying to work with NE, from what I can tell, but that could change fast. The Titans may get a bit better. Improved inner O-line, lost Cook but gained Walker, and may pick up Shonne Greene for a good second option to CJ. Though, that last addition could provide some lulz too. The need The Raiders have done nothing but get worse, SD is getting worse, while KC improved. As expected, they picked up A. Smith, but also Daniels from NO as a backup. Will be sad if Smith loses the starting gig...again. They also may be picking up a #2 in Avery from the Colts. Still, not anywhere near enough to come close to Den who will actually be improving with or without Dumerville. GB could improve at RB if they can get S Jackson cheap, and also may retain Jennings. Any news on them for the defensive side? I don't think I'm allowed to be excited yet, but Chi picking up a TE and O-lineman? I need time for that reality to sink in. The Colts are doing well on both sides of the ball, with the possibility of losing Avery being the only thing going wrong for them so far. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 13, 2013, 09:37:24 AM Re: Fitzpatrick.
There can be some openings besides TJax though who is just giving them time to find someone while not carrying Fitz's cap of $3mil which was due about now if they didn't cut him. Cassel and Flynn are their best options at this point imo. Though, they could also make a run for Kolb on the cheap if Ari can dump him, or Jason Campbell. I'm not saying they're the great options, but I think they shoud be considered. Which really is sad. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2013, 09:40:36 AM re: Ravens.
I think this almost gaurantees Ed Reed sticks in Baltimore. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: JWIV on March 13, 2013, 09:42:45 AM I think Baltimore is an indictator of what life will be like under the new cap. The second you win a Super Bowl, the QB gets paid, and the rest of the team gets dismantled to start over. The idea of "dynasties" occuring in a tight salary cap league anymore is laughable. The last dynasty we saw was the 2001-2004 Patriots. The reason was that the salary cap moved from $67m at the beginning of that dynasty to $80m at it's conclusion. That's over 16% in those 4 years. You know how much the cap has moved since 2009? 0% Crazy thing is - this isn't even all on Joe. For all the talk of $120 Million, his salary cap impact for this season is only 6 million. The Pollard release is probably the most shocking. I had expected the Ravens to lose Reed, but keep Pollard back there. Receiver wise, losing Boldin hurts, but his regular season production was mediocre (and completely eclipsed by his amazing post season), but after Smith and Jones, their depth chart is fairly mediocre with maybe 4 catches. But yah, this feels like the Ravens decided it was time for some significant rebuilding. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 13, 2013, 09:44:25 AM GB could improve at RB if they can get S Jackson cheap, and also may retain Jennings. Any news on them for the defensive side? I get the feeling GB won't do a damn thing in free agency. I'd love Jackson but I don't think they are willing to spend the kind of money he turned down in St. Louis so unless he takes a pay cut, that ain't happening. On the defensive side, they looked at Canty but obviously weren't that impressed. They let Walden go to the Colts ($16 MILLION... REALLY????) but I don't count that as much of a loss, especially if Nick Perry comes back healthy. I think they'll do most of their work on draft day. I'm ambivalent about Jennings - he could stay or go and I'd be ok so long as he doesn't go to a team in the division. I'd rather they work on extending Matthews and Rodgers with what salary cap they have left if they don't go after Jackson. I forgot about Jason Campbell. He'd be an upgrade over Tavaris Jackson in Buffalo but not as sexy a pick as Flynn. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 13, 2013, 09:54:37 AM GB could improve at RB if they can get S Jackson cheap, and also may retain Jennings. Any news on them for the defensive side? I get the feeling GB won't do a damn thing in free agency. I'd love Jackson but I don't think they are willing to spend the kind of money he turned down in St. Louis so unless he takes a pay cut, that ain't happening. On the defensive side, they looked at Canty but obviously weren't that impressed. They let Walden go to the Colts ($16 MILLION... REALLY????) but I don't count that as much of a loss, especially if Nick Perry comes back healthy. I think they'll do most of their work on draft day. I'm ambivalent about Jennings - he could stay or go and I'd be ok so long as he doesn't go to a team in the division. I'd rather they work on extending Matthews and Rodgers with what salary cap they have left if they don't go after Jackson. I forgot about Jason Campbell. He'd be an upgrade over Tavaris Jackson in Buffalo but not as sexy a pick as Flynn. I think Jackson would take a paycut for a contender, which is why I think there is good reason to believe that GB has a shot. That, and it is the one piece on the offensive side they need. I forgot about Walden, and also Woodson was cut. On a different note, and the plus side, someone just send me a link to ESPN's tracker, which is awesome. Enjoy all: http://espn.go.com/nfl/freeagency/?year=2013 Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 13, 2013, 10:15:31 AM I get the feeling the Falcons are going to try to fix their defense in the draft. They have no pass rushing at all.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on March 13, 2013, 10:35:17 AM Bush to the Lions. That might make them slightly more likely to convert on 3rd down at least. Bush will be the 2nd leading receiver pretty easily.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on March 13, 2013, 10:46:41 AM If the Browns buy into the 3-4 and they get a compliment to Haden on the opposite corner, they will be pretty scary on the defensive side of the coin. Not sure anything on the offensive side will make teams pause, but that is another issue. As for Cribbs... fuck him. Glorified return guy that is mediocre at best when placed into the slot. I was on the side that thought he should just get released after all that contract crying he did. Either way, they still need a legit no.1 receiver at some point of else they'll just keep sitting in the top ten draft pick slot year after year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2013, 10:57:42 AM Mendenhall snatched up by Arizona before he could get to Denver. WOO!
Hopefully now we can focus on SJAX. Edit: Per Schefter, Broncos hammering out deal with Welker. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/311910867946057728) Yes, please. Thomas and Decker with Welker in the slot? Yes. Now, go get Dansby and/or SJAX and plunge towards the Draft. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 13, 2013, 12:21:16 PM Dashon Goldson to the bucs, 5 yrs and for a pile of money that is more than I'll make in a lifetime so I stopped reading
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2013, 12:22:40 PM Niners snag Dorsey. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/311919507700596737)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 13, 2013, 12:42:29 PM Welker, Decker AND Thomas with Manning throwing to them, a good running game and defense? Shit. And oh yeah, in a shitty division with only the Chiefs having shown any signs of life.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on March 13, 2013, 01:05:21 PM Miami has spent but they got specific pieces that could help them a lot. Wallace gives them a credible deep threat receiver to augment Hartline over the middle, they got pass rush with the linebackers and their defense was already decent. The loss of Reggie Bush may be a concern but with the Jets guaranteed to suck and Buffalo's crappy D and INT-happy QB, they may certainly be in for a wild card this year. Dolphins aren't really concerned with letting Bush go since they're really high on Lamar Miller. The AFC in general is looking pretty wide open. Denver should be far and away the favorites but after that it's a whole lot of meh. Even the Patriots won't look so good on paper if they let Welker defect. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on March 13, 2013, 01:17:28 PM I think Baltimore is an indictator of what life will be like under the new cap. The second you win a Super Bowl, the QB gets paid, and the rest of the team gets dismantled to start over. The idea of "dynasties" occuring in a tight salary cap league anymore is laughable. The last dynasty we saw was the 2001-2004 Patriots. The reason was that the salary cap moved from $67m at the beginning of that dynasty to $80m at it's conclusion. That's over 16% in those 4 years. Dynasties can still happen as long as your QB is married to a supermodel who makes way more money than he ever could so doesn't need the money and is willing to sign a long term contract for way under market value.You know how much the cap has moved since 2009? 0% Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2013, 01:53:46 PM Wes Welker has agreed to terms with Denver Broncos. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/311942538036662273)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 13, 2013, 01:56:30 PM Oh shit son. :Mother of God.gif:
Yeah, that's all I got at this point.....holy hell. :ye_gods: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2013, 01:57:04 PM I am freaking the fuck out.
If you had told me two years ago that Peyton Manning would be our QB and Wes Welker would be a WR I would have called you a drunk. Edit: Deal is 2 years/$12 Million. GREAT. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 13, 2013, 02:02:50 PM This will get lost, but props to Brandon Stokely for being a true class act about this (http://blogs.denverpost.com/broncos/2013/03/13/brandon-stokley-on-broncos-pursuit-of-wes-welker-it-would-be-a-great-move/18860/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter).
And oh yeah, Den is also making a play for Nmandi, and still could end up with Dwight Freeney. Edit by Trippy: fixed your messed up tags. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2013, 02:10:18 PM yeah, Stokley is just a fantastic guy.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 13, 2013, 02:20:45 PM $6 million a year for Welker and the fucking Pats wouldn't match that? Or better it? The fuck? That is NOTHING unless the team has cap issues, especially not for the amount of production he's likely to bring.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2013, 02:22:08 PM $6 million a year for Welker and the fucking Pats wouldn't match that? Or better it? The fuck? That is NOTHING unless the team has cap issues, especially not for the amount of production he's likely to bring. And they don't have an issue. that's what Brady's whole deal was about. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 13, 2013, 02:31:04 PM Then I am completely flummoxed. I can't see one reason they wouldn't want to resign Welker for at least a 2-3 year contract. Hell, the Packers are STACKED at wideout even without Jennings and I'd have taken him in a heartbeat. I think he may be the best possession receiver the NFL has ever had.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 13, 2013, 02:34:29 PM Wow, that may be the steal of the year imo as it will be tough to find a better deal. NE's is now left holding a ticket in the Danny Amendola lottery. I like Amendola, but not more than I would have liked to have paid Welker $6-8mil or more to keep him with Brady/Hernandez/Gronk
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2013, 02:37:14 PM Icing. (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/257925/report-brady-beyond-enraged-at-welker-deal)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on March 13, 2013, 02:37:51 PM They are bringing back Randy Moss :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on March 13, 2013, 02:47:40 PM Then I am completely flummoxed. I can't see one reason they wouldn't want to resign Welker for at least a 2-3 year contract. Hell, the Packers are STACKED at wideout even without Jennings and I'd have taken him in a heartbeat. I think he may be the best possession receiver the NFL has ever had. Early last season it seemed Belichick was trying to phase Welker out of the offense until the injury bug hit the Patriots, and Welker seemed to take some shots at him because of it. My guess is the Patriots low balled Wellker due to bad blood. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 13, 2013, 02:57:05 PM I had seen his decreased production and heard rumors about them wanting to phase him out and even then I thought it was utterly retarded. He showed he can still catch the fuck out of the ball. If they truly offered him $10m for 2 years, that IS a goddamn insult. Welker's been one of my favorite wideouts since he was with the Dolphins even though I've hated the teams he's been on. I so hope Denver knocks New England out of the playoffs this year.
Titans signed Shonn Greene for 3yr/$10m. So now they'll have two overpaid running backs! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2013, 03:09:02 PM I think I may have a new avatar.
(http://seeingred.sltrib.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/11/srELWAY.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 13, 2013, 03:38:37 PM $6 million a year for Welker and the fucking Pats wouldn't match that? Or better it? The fuck? That is NOTHING unless the team has cap issues, especially not for the amount of production he's likely to bring. Welker didn't play by the "Patriot Way." So now he's gone. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 13, 2013, 04:24:10 PM Quote Regardless, Brady didn't renegotiate his deal to free up $8.2 million in 2013 cap space so the Patriots could let his favorite target walk for less than what Brian Hartline is making. Yeah, this puts things in perspective really nicely. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on March 13, 2013, 04:26:47 PM Apparently the entire contract is all guaranteed, though.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on March 13, 2013, 04:28:53 PM You've got to wonder how much politics are involved. It seems like the relationship with Welker and the Patriots has been strained over the last year or so and maybe they just decided to let him go. Goodness knows the Patriots have let good players go before and ended up fine on the other end.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2013, 04:30:11 PM Apparently Dominque Rodgers-Cromartie is in Denver at the moment too. :drill:
Patriots gave former Rams WR Danny Amendola's a five-year, $31 million deal that includes $10 million guaranteed. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/311983665901076481) :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 13, 2013, 05:24:52 PM Well if that doesn't tell you it all you need to know about Welker and the Patriot Way, nothing will.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on March 13, 2013, 05:27:44 PM Well, he is 4 years younger and similar in many ways. We'll see just how much of it was the system soon enough.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on March 13, 2013, 07:48:31 PM Amendola to Pats. There went any drop off from losing Welker. That kid is a talent.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 13, 2013, 07:53:56 PM I'd say there's a dropoff in talent and in durability. I like Amendola, but he is not Welker. The good thing for the Pats though - Amendola is a good slot receiver who is now going to be there as long as they have Brady as both now have 5 years on their contracts left.
And yeah, Den just got even better, and more classy. So, Rodgers-Cromartie is a Bronco now and The Boss asked Manning if he was okay grabbing Welker since that would mean cutting his friend Stokley Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 13, 2013, 07:57:36 PM Broncos reached agreement on a one-year deal with former Eagles CB Dominque Rodgers-Cromartie. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/312031329237737472)
:drill: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 13, 2013, 08:00:19 PM And Sea keeps getting better, Avril to the Seahawks.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on March 14, 2013, 06:33:57 AM P. Manning should be a first round fantasy pick this fall. He is going to have time in the pocket, 3 great targets and shitty division rivals. He will have a 30+ TD season easily.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 14, 2013, 07:38:54 AM P. Manning should be a first round fantasy pick this fall. He is going to have time in the pocket, 3 great targets and shitty division rivals. He will have a 30+ TD season easily. Just to make sure, you know he had 37 this last year, right? Chiefs released QB Matt Cassel. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/312210485833502720) Inevitable, of course. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on March 14, 2013, 07:39:50 AM P. Manning should be a first round fantasy pick this fall. He is going to have time in the pocket, 3 great targets and shitty division rivals. He will have a 30+ TD season easily. Just to make sure, you know he had 37 this last year, right? Delicious. It does lower the value of my fantasy stud keeper Demaryius this year though. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 14, 2013, 07:41:04 AM P. Manning should be a first round fantasy pick this fall. He is going to have time in the pocket, 3 great targets and shitty division rivals. He will have a 30+ TD season easily. Just to make sure, you know he had 37 this last year, right? Delicious. It does lower the value of my fantasy stud keeper Demaryius this year though. Eh. It has much more impact on Decker and the TEs, really. Or TE rather, who needs a two TE set with those three. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 14, 2013, 08:38:09 AM Amendola gets 5-years and $31 million with $10 guaranteed and they couldn't resign Welker? Holy shit, that's bad GMing right there. How many games has Amedonla missed over the last 3 years? 20 games. How many has Welker missed? 1. While I do think Welker is going to miss more games in the future as he's older, he's not THAT much older. I think that's a really fucking stupid decision. I'd rather have Welker personally. While Amendola will be better for a few more years, I think Welker's going to have more production. Also, Denver is just a better fucking team. Their defense is light years ahead of the Pats. The Pats Way can go fuck itself and I hope they don't win another championship with Hobo Bill.
Denver's only problem is their offensive coordinator not letting Peyton be Peyton for 60 minutes a game. Other than that, I see them sailing into the playoffs barring big-time injury issues. The Seahawks defense is going to be monstrous next year with Avril. Fuck. That's going to be a team you do not want to face down the stretch or in the playoffs. Indy upgraded their defense with Landry. They are looking pretty strong as well. It's kind of refreshing that this draft doesn't have a lot of big-name skill position players sucking up all the spotlight. Seeing O lineman and defensive guys going in the first round is going to create a different feel. I'm actually getting excited for the draft. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on March 14, 2013, 08:42:52 AM Amendola to Pats. There went any drop off from losing Welker. That kid is a talent. That was my exact thought. In the right system Amendola will shine. The fact that he's younger makes him a good investment for the future. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on March 14, 2013, 08:53:20 AM No knock against Amendola, but I can't agree. Welker is pure money, and Amendola will probably only be a shadow of what Wes gave them. Welker is an HOFer in my opinion. Amendola hasn't really proved much other than that he is fragile as all hell.
More importantly, how pissed do you think Tom Brady is right now? Probably mentioned up in the thread somewhere, but didn't he give up millions for the exact reason of keeping guys like Welker around? It might not have any long term impact on his performance, but who the hell knows. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 14, 2013, 08:58:13 AM More importantly, how pissed do you think Tom Brady is right now? Probably mentioned up in the thread somewhere, but didn't he give up millions for the exact reason of keeping guys like Welker around? It might not have any long term impact on his performance, but who the hell knows. Yes it was. Yes he was. Yes he did. And yes it will. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 14, 2013, 09:55:32 AM Really good free agency transaction summary as of last night: http://www.rotoworld.com/articles/nfl/42765/310/nfl-hot-stove-day-3
As for Cassel, his best spots are what, Buf, TB, and maybe Minn? He'd improve any of those teams (arguable for TB but still likely), with Minn being the best available for him if they can grab Jennings from GB as well. With Laron Landry to the Colts, them talking with Ricky Jean-Francois today, and they've already improved their O-line as well, they may be my favorites for the AFC South (if they get RJF). More so if they can grab a RB to help take even more pressure off of Luck. Plenty of cheap RB improvements available, but getting in on the SJAX bidding would be good. Also, plenty of cheaper WR with lots of upside left if they don't want to draft one of the taller prospects to develop under Wayne in the draft (someone like Danario Alexander, Domenik Hixon, Edelman, DHB, etc. would be cheap investments who are young enough to improve quite a bit with mentoring and a good QB). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 14, 2013, 10:00:34 AM No knock against Amendola, but I can't agree. Welker is pure money, and Amendola will probably only be a shadow of what Wes gave them. Welker is an HOFer in my opinion. Amendola hasn't really proved much other than that he is fragile as all hell. More importantly, how pissed do you think Tom Brady is right now? Probably mentioned up in the thread somewhere, but didn't he give up millions for the exact reason of keeping guys like Welker around? It might not have any long term impact on his performance, but who the hell knows. Brady actually got more money by a couple of million, but less of a hit to the cap by more than what Amendola is receiving. Think the reduction in Brady's cap number was something like $6.3mil Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 14, 2013, 10:20:05 AM No knock against Amendola, but I can't agree. Welker is pure money, and Amendola will probably only be a shadow of what Wes gave them. Welker is an HOFer in my opinion. Amendola hasn't really proved much other than that he is fragile as all hell. More importantly, how pissed do you think Tom Brady is right now? Probably mentioned up in the thread somewhere, but didn't he give up millions for the exact reason of keeping guys like Welker around? It might not have any long term impact on his performance, but who the hell knows. Brady actually got more money by a couple of million, but less of a hit to the cap by more than what Amendola is receiving. Think the reduction in Brady's cap number was something like $6.3mil $8.2M (http://www.rotoworld.com/player/nfl/1163/tom-brady) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 14, 2013, 10:24:51 AM Or that number, thanks. Point being it was more than enough to keep his favorite target happy and it's understandable he's a bit upset at what has happened. Especially since Welker went right to the top contender in the AFC
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 14, 2013, 10:29:01 AM Or that number, thanks. Point being it was more than enough to keep his favorite target happy and it's understandable he's a bit upset at what has happened. Especially since Welker went right to the top contender in the AFC Oh, I wasn't disagreeing with you. Brady has every reason to be pissed. And his tears are delicious. Almost as delicious as the hidden tears from Tennessee (http://larrybrownsports.com/football/wes-welker-turned-down-money-broncos/179111). Reminder, we beat them out for Manning last year (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1106798-breaking-down-tennessee-titans-contract-for-life-offer-to-peyton-manning). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 14, 2013, 11:57:21 AM Didn't believe we were disagreeing, I was just restating my point in a more clear way and thanking you for the more accurate number. The Tenn thing is sad because that is (what seems like) a class-act organization, trying to do well for the team and city, but keeps getting left behind. Though, it's funny because the misery happened to someone else....repeatedly now :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 14, 2013, 12:10:23 PM So that we agree that we agree. Good to go. ;D
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 14, 2013, 12:34:31 PM Tuck rule change proposal. (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000150828/article/nfl-proposes-to-change-tuck-rule)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 14, 2013, 01:06:14 PM The hits keep on rolling - Colts signed RJF, meanwhile the Chiefs picked up both Sean Smith and Dunta Robinson giving them one of the best defensive backfields. KC has been somewhat quiet due to all the other news, or well... due to all the Denver news anyways, but their acquisitions are piling up fast which will go nicely with their high draft picks if they use them wisely. I can honestly see them fighting for a wild card if they stay healthy after improving just about all of their areas of concern while the AFC North and East end up only sending one team to the post-season
Cassel to the Vikings. Along with the Tuck rule, there are some others like preventing runners from dipping their helmets into tacklers. Edit: also, the anticipated change to the challenge rule so if a play is supposed to undergo an automatic challenge, no matter what it will still be reviewed even if a red flag is thrown when unneeded. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 14, 2013, 01:08:18 PM How little confidence does your team have to have in Christian Ponder to hire MATT CASSELL? As a Packers fan, I wholeheartedly endorse this transaction.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 14, 2013, 01:11:47 PM SJax to the FALCONS. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/312294597638385664)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 14, 2013, 01:33:52 PM Did not see that coming, but good move by SJAX too.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on March 14, 2013, 01:40:39 PM They have better retirement homes in Atlanta or something?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 14, 2013, 01:52:13 PM Fuck. I was hoping Green Bay would sign him but I don't think they wanted to spend the money he was looking for. Oh well. At least we didn't sign Shonn Greene.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 14, 2013, 02:02:40 PM Welp. Cary Williams from the Ravens to the Eagles. 3-year, $17 million. 75 tackles, 4 INTs, 17 passes defensed.
Going to be mighty hard sledding to create a defense from fucking scratch. The Eagles also signed Kenny Phillips, Safety from the Giants with injury issues. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 14, 2013, 02:26:08 PM Yeah, well, I guess all the good news meant this was going to happen.
Broncos safety Quinton Carter facing Vegas cheating case (http://Broncos safety Quinton Carter facing Vegas cheating case) :ye_gods: Hartline working in a drive-through durign the offseason, and conducts an interview while doing so. (http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/pattisonave/Dolphins-receiver-conducts-interview-from-job-at-drive-thru.html) :drill: (http://i.imgur.com/yBBKln3.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 15, 2013, 07:19:26 AM (http://i.imgur.com/yBBKln3.jpg) :awesome_for_real:Eagles also picked up Barwin from Hou. I didn't see it mentioned in all the Baltimore purging, but Eagles also grabbed Cary Williams Sea loses Leon Washington, but oh hey look you get Michael Bennett. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 15, 2013, 08:47:11 AM Hartline working in a drive-through durign the offseason, and conducts an interview while doing so. (http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/pattisonave/Dolphins-receiver-conducts-interview-from-job-at-drive-thru.html) :drill: That dude just got major respect from me. (https://dl.dropbox.com/u/1739972/web-images/respek-knuckles.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 15, 2013, 09:23:04 AM Kevin Kolb released by the Cardinals rather than pay a $2 million roster bonus (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9055995/kevin-kolb-released-arizona-cardinals).
They also apparently signed Drew Stanton, who has been out of football for 2 years, probably for a Necco Wafer and some bus fare. ESPN bobbleheads are thinking the Jets will bring him in even after they brought in Garrard. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 15, 2013, 09:33:12 AM It's amazing to me how many NFL organizations are just floundering for QBs.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 15, 2013, 09:33:56 AM While I dig it that Hartline is a store owner and works in the offseason, I still prefer a similar story from a few weeks back about Terrance Ganaway making sandwhiches at Jimmy John's (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/02/22/terrance-ganaway-making-sandwiches-while-rams-are-off/)
He's okay financially, but says he's doing it to stay out of trouble and keeps him from spending money while filling his offseason time Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: JWIV on March 15, 2013, 09:39:53 AM (http://i.imgur.com/yBBKln3.jpg) That looks about right. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 15, 2013, 12:34:17 PM Elvis Dumervil agreed to salary reduction, smartly. Remains in Denver. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/312647327120773120)
:drill: :drill: :drill: Oh jesus. Agent didn't fax the paperwork in time... salary cap issues, chance for other teams to jump on him. Edit: Dove Valely didn't get the paperwork until 1:59, and had to protect themselves from the $12M hit and released Dumervil. Colossal "mistake" on the part of the agent. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 15, 2013, 02:13:05 PM Wow fucking paperwork fail. That's gloriously bad from a front office.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 15, 2013, 02:13:59 PM Wow fucking paperwork fail. That's gloriously bad from a front office. It is NOT the front office. The situation was on the shoulders of the agent. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 15, 2013, 02:27:37 PM This is why no one likes mountain time, seriously, fuck mountain time. Though, considering the horseshoe the Broncos' front office has up their ass, I think they'll be fine and likely still be able to get him back somehow. If not, how awful of a situation are you in when your back up choices are Abraham or Freeney.
On the other hand, based on how free agency has been this week, Sea may have another pass rusher soon :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 15, 2013, 02:29:43 PM The problem is that we eat the $5M dead money hit now.
Basically, there was a $4,869,000 dead money hit associated with Dumervil for 2013's cap. The restructure was going to push that money into later years as Guaranteed Money. However, to protect themselves from the $12M pay hit, and going over the cap, the broncos had to cut Dumervil at the deadline. So, to get back to where they SHOULD have been with the deal, they would have to sign Dumervil at 3,131,000, and then Dumervil (assuming he had no involvement and wants back on the Broncos) would sue the agent or collect some inuserance that agents are mandated to carry by the NFLPA. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on March 15, 2013, 02:37:17 PM Yeah, which sucks but considering he was willing to take a huge paycut to stay with Den I am guessing some magic of him taking even less (like $3mil) with promise of making some of that up later may be possible when other top talent pass rushers are signing for $5-8/yr. Depends how badly he wants to stay in Den of course, and how much his new agent will want when he finds one :why_so_serious:
Though, admittedly and obviously, I'm not completely up to par on the inner workings of caps and then the liklihood of him wanting to take that much less than what he's worth isn't likely. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 15, 2013, 02:37:41 PM Wow fucking paperwork fail. That's gloriously bad from a front office. It is NOT the front office. The situation was on the shoulders of the agent. It sounds like a bit of both, tbh. The agent is at fault at the very end, but they both strung this thing out to the last minute. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 15, 2013, 02:51:20 PM Wow fucking paperwork fail. That's gloriously bad from a front office. It is NOT the front office. The situation was on the shoulders of the agent. It sounds like a bit of both, tbh. The agent is at fault at the very end, but they both strung this thing out to the last minute. No. The Broncos gave them the deadline of 1PM mountain. The Broncos began to look at new options seriously as that deadline passed. At 1:25 broncos heard that there was a verbal agreement, and sent the new contract to the agent. Agent did not get it back to them until 1:59. There is a window between 1:25 and 1:59, but broncos had set that deadline of 1PM. This is on the agent. Broncos did not drag their feat when this all unfolded. They were preparing for Life After Dumervil. Edit: Mind you, if we look at the bigger picture, both could have sorted this out, I think. But Broncos set a firm "Accept it or walk" offer with a deadline. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 15, 2013, 02:56:36 PM Things went on for a week. :oh_i_see:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 15, 2013, 03:04:27 PM Things went on for a week. :oh_i_see: That's what the edit on my post above is for. There is an allowance that there is room for 2 months that they could have hopefully worked something out. Both sides had moved closer over the last week. Broncos finally yesterday said "here it is. this is it" and set the deadline at 1pm. The agent came back AFTER that, but at that point the broncos moved fast, from everything we know. If they had wanted to cut him and move on, they could have just done that and be where they are now. You said up there that ultimately it is on the agent, I am just emphasizing that part of it and relating the info, being the one following along with it. Edit: NFL.com reporting a faulty fax machine possibly involved. (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000151159/article/elvis-dumervil-released-by-denver-broncos-after-fax-blunder?campaign=Facebook_writers_darlington) I think we can agree here though.. WHY ARE WE STILL USING FAXES. Edit 2: And of course, lots of he said she said/hearsay going on now. Andrew Brandt: Talked to another team exec who talked to agent, who says Denver didn't send to new contract to him until 8 mins before deadline. (https://twitter.com/adbrandt/status/312684678832324608) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 15, 2013, 04:16:58 PM Jennings now a Viking. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/312703333683056640)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 15, 2013, 04:18:18 PM In a case of he said, she said, a sports agent has just as much credibility as a convicted murderer.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 15, 2013, 07:16:03 PM Jennings to the Viking is probably the worst case scenario of losing Jennings. I guess he wants to show the Packers what they were missing, though I think he's going to hate life about mid-season if Ponder doesn't improve his consistency. It's a good move for the Vikings, but I'm not so sure how the Metrodome is going to be on his legs. I was prepared to live life without Jennings as our next 3 receivers on the depth chart have All-Pro talent, IMO. I just didn't want him going to a division rival.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on March 15, 2013, 08:01:02 PM That's another good player who's giving the finger to the Pack by wearing the purple. Doesn't come off well for the organization or the players.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 15, 2013, 09:26:16 PM Not really. I think most players know the deal with the Packers. They aren't going to pay huge salaries to most non-QB's. They are going to build young talent through the draft. You play for the Pack, you have a chance at yearly trips to the playoffs and maybe a Super Bowl, after which you can cash in at the place that will overpay you but you might never win again. It's not like they are Hobo Bill'ing people.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 15, 2013, 09:45:13 PM i mean, the packers relied SO MUCH on Jennings this year.... oh wait...
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on March 15, 2013, 10:12:36 PM I guess he's tired of having to actually catch a pass. Ponder is awful.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on March 18, 2013, 09:05:15 PM I guess he's tired of having to actually catch pass. Ponder is awful. Ponder is young and inexperienced. I think the kid has potential. That's different from Fitzpatrick and Tebow who ARE awful. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 19, 2013, 10:13:42 AM I think Ponder can be a good QB with some weapons. He seems to have a certain calm in the pocket when he's getting rushed. He needs to cut down on the INT's, up the completion percentage and be more consistent, but it's not like he's Blaine Gabbert level of fail. Not yet anyway.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on March 19, 2013, 01:56:57 PM In case you missed it, the Niners now have 15 picks in this draft (http://blog.sfgate.com/49ers/2013/03/18/the-picks-are-in-49ers-receive-3-compensatory-selections/).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on March 19, 2013, 03:05:25 PM In case you missed it, the Niners now have 15 picks in this draft (http://blog.sfgate.com/49ers/2013/03/18/the-picks-are-in-49ers-receive-3-compensatory-selections/). ... and 10 of them will either be cut or placed on the practice squad. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 19, 2013, 03:20:25 PM I imagine they might do some horse trading at the draft. And let's face it, if they do use all 15 and only 5 of them make the roster, that's still a pretty good percentage. I read an article analyzing the Packers' draft of 2009 and of them, only 3 were still on the roster for last year - but 2 of those 3 were Clay Matthews and BJ Raji, pro bowlers and Super Bowl vets winners now. I imagine if the Niners got that level of quality out of their draft, they'd be happy.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on March 20, 2013, 12:47:24 PM That article begs the question. When the 49ers got that 7th round pick this year from the Bengals in 2011, did they know what number in the 7th round it was? Did the Bengals 2012 record impact the draft pick's placement? Or is there so much horsetrading with draft picks that the answer isn't worth the time to understand?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 20, 2013, 02:31:40 PM In the 7th round, it's usually not going to matter much anyway. 7th rounders are usually practice squad depth picks at best.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on March 20, 2013, 02:33:24 PM In the 7th round, it's usually not going to matter much anyway. 7th rounders are usually practice squad depth picks at best. But we could find the next Ryan Fitzpatrick. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on March 20, 2013, 02:47:15 PM I didn't think turnovers were that hard to find. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on March 20, 2013, 02:50:29 PM That article begs the question. When the 49ers got that 7th round pick this year from the Bengals in 2011, did they know what number in the 7th round it was? Did the Bengals 2012 record impact the draft pick's placement? Or is there so much horsetrading with draft picks that the answer isn't worth the time to understand? When you trade for future picks you are taking the pick that the team earns with its record that year in the future. Its like that in all American sports as far as I can think of. Decent link the lists seem ok if you wan't to catch up on things: http://www.jsonline.com/sports/packers/freeagents19-ha970pa-198866041.html Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on March 20, 2013, 03:03:02 PM I didn't think turnovers were that hard to find. :why_so_serious: But Harvard! Also sexy beard! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 03, 2013, 08:51:40 AM So, Carson Palmer is an Arizona Cardinal now and Matt Flynn is the Raiders new starting QB.
Does anyone remember an offseason that has seen so much of a QB carousel like ever? It's crazy how many QB's have been shuffled around. As for these trades, this just shows how bad the original Palmer to the Raiders trade was (and how wrong I was about it). The Raiders mortgaged their future on a guy who should have been able to take them to the playoffs that year but didn't. Now they can barely get a sixth rounder and a conditional for him. Of course, he instantly made Arizona a better team because holy fuck was that a greasefire of a QB situation last year. I feel bad for Matt Flynn as he's got NO ONE to throw to. He had better be as good as advertised because he could end up being a huge disaster on a team with this little talent at wideout. And yet, somehow the Jags, who have possibly the worst QB situation of all the teams (even worse than Arizona did I think), have done nothing on the QB front of note. Gabbert, Henne and whoever they draft will compete to get plastered non-stop because no one will be fucking open. Of all the shuffled QB's, I actually think Alex Smith has the best chance to be good this year. Low INT's, O line is not a complete disaster, they have some offensive weapons and a coach who has a history of getting absolute fucking streetwalkers to catch passes from competent QB's (Freddie Mitchell, James Thrash, Todd Pinkston anyone?). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on April 03, 2013, 09:01:33 AM One day people will stop betting the franchise on a USC quarterback. Until then, I will scoff at any GM that doesn't learn from the past. They are a QB fail factory.
Now we get to see somebody make a stupid decision on Matt Barkley. My bet is the Vikings draft him in the late first round, because their QB situation is a complete mess. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 03, 2013, 09:08:38 AM I'm still not convinced Christian Ponder is a mess. He may be Sanchez level of inconsistency but if he can smooth out the performances, he might be decent. A lot of that will depend on how healthy Jennings can be.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on April 03, 2013, 10:37:33 AM Free agency has been insane this year, so no I don't remember another year like this with the swapping of QBs. I said the same thing about KC before - they are not far from being a good team, and they [imo] fixed pretty much all of their gaping problems if they can stay healthy.
I think Ponder can become decent, he's not being fed bullshit and requiring ego-boosts like Failchez. Also, just because it's a great story, Brian Banks is a Falcon (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/04/03/brian-banks-credits-his-mom-on-his-first-day-as-a-falcon/). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on April 03, 2013, 11:09:12 AM Glad to see Banks get a shot. He tried out in Seattle last year and I was rooting for him.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on April 03, 2013, 11:19:14 AM I'm still not convinced Christian Ponder is a mess. He may be Sanchez level of inconsistency but if he can smooth out the performances, he might be decent. A lot of that will depend on how healthy Jennings can be. He's an interception machine. He had 58 yards passing against Arizona with 2 picks. Twice he's had QB ratings in the 30s. In 9 games he's had less than 200 yards passing, 3 of which were less than 100 yards. WHAT? They've turned him into a checkdown Charlie to increase he completions, but he's still throwing picks. They were the 31st passing offense in the league, BEHIND THE JETS. The worst part is that he had time to throw. He only got sacked 32 times (his protection is 10th ranked in the league) He's ass. Cut bait now before he goes UFA, and save yourself a 3M cap hit. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on April 03, 2013, 11:29:07 AM And yet, somehow the Jags, who have possibly the worst QB situation of all the teams (even worse than Arizona did I think), have done nothing on the QB front of note. Gabbert, Henne and whoever they draft will compete to get plastered non-stop because no one will be fucking open. Cecil Shorts was my best fantasy free agent pickup. He was playing really well until he started getting those concussions. Almost 1,000 yards receiving and 7 TDs and I don't think he was even starting until after their week 6 bye. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 03, 2013, 12:07:52 PM One thing to remember about Ponder though is after game 9, he had no receivers. Once Harvin went out, they were so shit-scared of the absolutely terrible set of receivers they just started handing the ball off to Peterson all game and only throwing when necessary. Yes, he has bad numbers, but when Harvin was in, those numbers were good.
That said, it's year 3. We all know if he doesn't improve by week 6, his backup will get the nod. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on April 03, 2013, 12:10:57 PM Yeah, but with Shorts the problem was you never knew which Jac (if any) WR was going to have a decent day. It kept switching between him and Robinson
He's an interception machine. He had 58 yards passing against Arizona with 2 picks. Twice he's had QB ratings in the 30s. In 9 games he's had less than 200 yards passing, 3 of which were less than 100 yards. WHAT? They've turned him into a checkdown Charlie to increase he completions, but he's still throwing picks. They were the 31st passing offense in the league, BEHIND THE JETS. The worst part is that he had time to throw. He only got sacked 32 times (his protection is 10th ranked in the league) He's ass. Cut bait now before he goes UFA, and save yourself a 3M cap hit. The "interception machine" would be part of the inconsistency even though he still was not all that bad for TD:Int of a 2nd year player without a lot of WR to throw to for a lot of the season. The other part of that imo is him being the guy who gives AP the ball and gets the fuck out of the way. Overall, he still had a respectable throwing yardage number around 3,000, and he really can show some decent consistency (see weeks 1-5 2012). Additionally, and this is important imo, his worst games were during AP's best games, but Ponder's best games where he picked up his game were when AP was not doing that great (during AP's 6 sub-100 yard games for instance). That is why he's workable, whereas Sanchez never really was imo. Although it is completely obvious that he is not a franchie QB without some MAJOR improvements, he isn't really someone you just dumb on a 2012 season unless Minn can pick up Palmer or Flynn for cheap. As for stats and what not - Ponder did have 2 games in the 30's for QBR, and 4 games under 60, he's also had 4 games over 100 with one of them being 120+. Now to give credit where due - 3 out of 4 of those sub 60 QBR were against top defenses (Sea, Chi, Hou) and the Cardinals passing defense for a lot of the season was not that bad at all and finished with the 2nd most picks, and either the 4th or 5th least passing yards given up. Ponder's +100 QBR games were against Jac, Ind, Det and GB. with his best performance against a good team be in the 90s against SF. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on April 03, 2013, 12:37:29 PM Yeah, but with Shorts the problem was you never knew which Jac (if any) WR was going to have a decent day. It kept switching between him and Robinson I disagree. For a non-top tier receiver he was pretty consistent when he was starting. I'm not saying he the second coming of Calvin Johnson or even Wes Welker, but he seems pretty productive to me (when healthy, of course). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on April 03, 2013, 02:16:51 PM Oops I said Robinson, but meant Blackmon and even that was way off as my reasoning is just not right. The ups and downs were still a problem, just not because of other WR. Yes, he was red-hot during the midseason after the bye, and he only had 1 "bad" game with week 9 in that stretch, but he still had a lot of playtime early in the season (I think he even started once or twice). That is where the highs and lows are from.
I'm not saying he was bad or anything, in fact he got me through some mid-season weeks when a number of my WRs and Flex options were on bye weeks, just that it wasn't always easy trusting him with the early highs and lows Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 10, 2013, 09:48:25 AM Seems like this is going to be a trainwreck of an NFL draft if Geno Smith and Matt Barkley are chosen in the first round.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on April 16, 2013, 02:36:45 PM http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9179704/legendary-broadcaster-pat-summerall-dies-82
John Madden's partner in crime, Pat Summerall, passes away. I grew up with him and Madden explaining the sport to me... They were the Laurel and Hardy of the NFL broadcast boost. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 16, 2013, 02:39:46 PM Now that is a damn shame. :cry:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on April 16, 2013, 02:42:59 PM Aw shit, I too grew up with Pat Summerall! I can hear his voice in my head right now. I bet I heard his games more than all others of his era combined.
Broadcasting legend indeed. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on April 16, 2013, 04:20:04 PM Well shit, that sucks :cry:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on April 16, 2013, 05:55:22 PM He's certainly one of the sports voices of my childhood. He had a good run into his 80s. I have fond memories of his game calls.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 23, 2013, 12:54:01 PM So what do you think, does Vince Young deserve a look see by some team or not?
When I look at his stats, he's marginal, at best, but he does provide the intangibles. But then again he's been a clusterfuck both off the field and on with his mental status. I still can't help thinking that he would be a better choice than Fitzpatrick or Ponder or maybe even Bradford. There are a lot of chuckleheads in the NFL playing QB, and with the transformation into a spread option league seemingly becoming more of a reality, could VY be worth a look for some team? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 23, 2013, 01:09:47 PM he's been a clusterfuck both off the field and on with his mental status. The only worse option is Jamarcus Russell. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 23, 2013, 01:24:50 PM But.....if he's pulled his shit together there is certainly some talent there. I'm actually surprised that some of the idiots that play QB in the NFL can retain a job yet VY can't even hold a clipboard.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on April 23, 2013, 01:27:42 PM But.....if he's pulled his shit together there is certainly some talent there. I'm actually surprised that some of the idiots that play QB in the NFL can retain a job yet VY can't even hold a clipboard. VY has proven to be a total liability. The chance he goes and does something to earn the team negative press means I wouldn't even take him as a backup if he agreed to play for free. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 23, 2013, 01:33:37 PM Has he? I think Jeff Fisher was as much to blame for the Tennessee Fiasco. Not that VY was blameless in the situation, but Fisher was a complete cunt. And it's not like he was out killing dogs. Vince made a few bad choices (not really bad, just questionable) and acted like a 2 year old a couple of times. He seems to be willing to put in the work now.
So convince me that he's not a better choice than: 1. Christian Ponder 2. Matt Cassel 3. Mark Sanchez 4. Chad Henne 5. Brandon Weeden 6. Jake Locker 7. Ryan Tannehill 8. Blaine Gabbert 9. Mike Vick 10. Nick Foles 11. Any clipboard carrier Hell, if nothing else you'd gain a shitton of UT fans pulling for your team in Tebow-esque fashion. I don't think Young is a risk to do anything really stupid, like shoot someone or molest a dog. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 23, 2013, 01:36:13 PM He's shown that when adversity strikes, he acts like a goddamn baby and pouts. His passing numbers aren't much better than Tebow's. I'd take him over Tebow if based just on numbers, but I'd be wary of his locker room presence. For a team looking for a QB, even of the backup variety, he's just not "the answer."
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on April 23, 2013, 01:37:23 PM Now listing Weeden there might be pushing things a bit. He only has one year under his belt and, more importantly, he plays for the Browns.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 23, 2013, 01:39:12 PM He's shown that when adversity strikes, he acts like a goddamn baby and pouts. His passing numbers aren't much better than Tebow's. I'd take him over Tebow if based just on numbers, but I'd be wary of his locker room presence. For a team looking for a QB, even of the backup variety, he's just not "the answer." Many of his former teammates have come out to support him in the past. That issue where he basically quit a game for the Titans will haunt him, for sure. I dunno, man, if he interviewed well and showed reasonable work ethic I think (If I were a GM) that I'd rather take a chance on him than any of the chucklefucks available in this year's draft. Addendum- Goddam his mechanics and footwork are awful. :uhrr: VY "highlights" are tough to watch. Another thing....when reviewing his stats (from college and pro) he really only had one spectacular year- his third year at UT. Otherwise he has been a 50/50 interception to TD guy with a running game. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 23, 2013, 03:04:29 PM VY is Michael Vick with a worse arm. But at least he loves dogs. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 23, 2013, 03:05:25 PM Quarterback is a putrid fucking position in the NFL.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on April 23, 2013, 03:06:20 PM He's had his chance and shown he cannot at all hack it. Not only does he not hack it he makes it very difficult for the rest of the team to function like professionals thanks to his bullshit drama. If he wants to be in the league he should fuck off to Canada and show that even outside his comfort zone he can play football and be a professional.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on April 23, 2013, 03:22:27 PM VY is a good QB and had good stats with the Titans at first, but I'm sorry to say he's a head case. I was really pulling for him, but he just couldn't hack it.
A cautionary tale to Cam Newton. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on April 23, 2013, 03:25:31 PM Vince Young a better choice than Ryan Tannehill? Really? :uhrr:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on April 23, 2013, 04:24:26 PM Has he? I think Jeff Fisher was as much to blame for the Tennessee Fiasco. Not that VY was blameless in the situation, but Fisher was a complete cunt. And it's not like he was out killing dogs. Vince made a few bad choices (not really bad, just questionable) and acted like a 2 year old a couple of times. He seems to be willing to put in the work now. So convince me that he's not a better choice than: 1. Christian Ponder 2. Matt Cassel 3. Mark Sanchez 4. Chad Henne 5. Brandon Weeden 6. Jake Locker 7. Ryan Tannehill 8. Blaine Gabbert 9. Mike Vick 10. Nick Foles 11. Any clipboard carrier Hell, if nothing else you'd gain a shitton of UT fans pulling for your team in Tebow-esque fashion. I don't think Young is a risk to do anything really stupid, like shoot someone or molest a dog. Why replace a mediocre QB with another mediocre QB with a reputation for losing his shit when things go bad? Its not like Vince Young is going to turn a franchise around, so why bother? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on April 23, 2013, 04:37:34 PM Vince Young a better choice than Ryan Tannehill? Really? :uhrr: I was wondering that too, Tannehill isn't a lights-out QB, but he's solid and I'd give him decent odds to take Miami to the playoffs this year. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on April 23, 2013, 07:29:12 PM Also his wife is SMOKIN hot.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on April 23, 2013, 10:47:24 PM Teeth too large for face. Calves too muscular. WNB.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on April 24, 2013, 08:34:31 AM Teeth too large for face. Calves too muscular. WNB. :uhrr: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 24, 2013, 08:38:02 AM Her butt and legs look pretty flabby. I'm not particularly interested, TBH.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on April 24, 2013, 11:37:33 AM Teeth too large for face. Calves too muscular. WNB. :uhrr: 2/10 Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on April 24, 2013, 02:19:10 PM A picture of a woman, better critique every little thing and let my peers on the internet know whether or not I would bang her.
So, as I said: :uhrr: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 24, 2013, 02:51:32 PM A picture of a woman, better critique every little thing and let my peers on the internet know whether or not I would bang her. So, as I said: :uhrr: Have you frequented the internet before? :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on April 24, 2013, 10:43:31 PM A picture of a woman, better critique every little thing and let my peers on the internet know whether or not I would bang her. So, as I said: :uhrr: You have more than 6000 posts here, come on man. You didn't just fall into the sarchasm, you strapped a Wile Coyote sized rocked to your back and launched yourself into it at Mach 47. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on April 25, 2013, 07:21:40 AM A picture of a woman, better critique every little thing and let my peers on the internet know whether or not I would bang her. So, as I said: :uhrr: You have more than 6000 posts here, come on man. You didn't just fall into the sarchasm, you strapped a Wile Coyote sized rocked to your back and launched yourself into it at Mach 47. To much time spent on reddit where people mean this sort of thing I guess. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on April 25, 2013, 09:16:59 AM Would anyone care to comment on how sharp her knees are?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 25, 2013, 09:22:58 AM She's got really big feet. :psyduck:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on April 25, 2013, 11:36:54 AM Clearly she's some kind of deformed troll. :oh_i_see:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 25, 2013, 05:49:47 PM Eric Fisher over Luke Joekel seems like a bit of a reach.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 25, 2013, 06:51:30 PM First round seems to be about half reaches, half solid picks.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on April 25, 2013, 06:57:08 PM All linemen all the time.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 25, 2013, 07:18:23 PM Is Isaiah Thomas drafting for the Bills? :why_so_serious:
And to make the stupid seem all that much worse, Jarvis Jones is taken with the next pick by Pittsburgh. And that would explain eh Pittsburgh is a good team and the Bills are not. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on April 26, 2013, 03:55:33 AM Most bizarre draft I have ever watched... (well first round anyway). It was the first time I recall that there were no sure things in the draft that got all the headlines prior to the first pick - and I am talking about the flashy positions. We heard a lot about Fisher and Joeckel, but the tackle position is just not a highlight position. Only 1 QB taken? No RBs taken? Other than Lacy, who are the other RBs in the draft? Just odd. At least the Browns didn't fuck things up too bad and take Geno... made a bet with my friend in Chicago that if that happened, I would be forced to buy a Steeler's jersey and wear it throughout the season. Mingo though? Really figured they grab any of the CBs there to compliment Haden. How about Hayden? :awesome_for_real:
But Mingo is coming from my Tigers so I can't complain - he'll be an outside linebacker most likely given his size is a bit small for end. Still shocked Miami moved up to take the Oregon kid... and the Bills going with Manuel? Do they not watch FSU games up in Buffalo? And who the hell is Travis Fredrick? Very weird draft so far... Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 26, 2013, 07:47:27 AM I think the Bills took Manuel because they have fallen in love with THE PISTOL (i.e. Wildcat 2.0). Gruden practically fell all over himself talking about mobile QB's. I suppose after years of coaching Brad Johnson, you'd be thrilled to see a QB that could get out of the way of a horse-drawn buggy. The Miami pick was very puzzling. Sounds like that LB is an iffy, potential upside but little data type of player. When they need a left tackle and there was supposedly a good one available, why get a LB?
I like the Packers' pick of Dontae Jones. A versatile pass rushing DE. In the highlight reel they showed of him, he looked really good. I'm still hoping they take Montee Ball in the 2nd round and not Lacey. Lacey's potential injury issues are likely why he fell out of the first round (well, that and RB not being a glamour position on 90% of the teams anymore). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 26, 2013, 07:56:27 AM Geno Smith was the obvious choice over Manuel though.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 26, 2013, 07:57:42 AM BUT THE PISTOL!!!!!!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 26, 2013, 07:58:43 AM I'm really surprised that Jarvis Jones went so low.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on April 26, 2013, 09:03:08 AM Skinny spines have no place in the NFL! Hope he does well though. The Steelers will put training wheels on him this year at least, as not to rush him into anything.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on April 26, 2013, 10:14:11 AM This draft shows that no matter how much ESPN hypes their boys like Teo and Barkley, NFL guys are not buying.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on April 26, 2013, 11:13:09 AM The Miami pick was very puzzling. Sounds like that LB is an iffy, potential upside but little data type of player. When they need a left tackle and there was supposedly a good one available, why get a LB? Miami management heard that Jordan was being compared to Jason Taylor so they couldn't get out of the way of their own boners to not take him. He's supposedly not even going to be healthy for training camp so we'll see how that goes. :awesome_for_real: Also, I hate the new Dolphins logo. In an era of being mindful of concussions, they go and take off the helmet! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on April 26, 2013, 03:11:11 PM This draft shows that no matter how much ESPN hypes their boys like Teo and Barkley, NFL guys are not buying. They need to fill up 24 hours a day with sports news. It is no wonder they have to make up compelling stories. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on April 26, 2013, 05:59:51 PM Teo going to the chargers in round 2. I think it's one they will regret, but time will tell in the afc west.
Round two goes by and still no Barkley pick. Could it be that NFL gms are finally learning that Usc qbs are a total disaster? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on April 26, 2013, 07:26:58 PM The Miami pick was very puzzling. Sounds like that LB is an iffy, potential upside but little data type of player. When they need a left tackle and there was supposedly a good one available, why get a LB? Miami management heard that Jordan was being compared to Jason Taylor so they couldn't get out of the way of their own boners to not take him. He's supposedly not even going to be healthy for training camp so we'll see how that goes. :awesome_for_real: Also, I hate the new Dolphins logo. In an era of being mindful of concussions, they go and take off the helmet! I've never understood that. The helmet has a dolphin with a 'M' on his helmet. Shouldn't he also have a dolphin on his? Dolphins all the way down! Or did I just blow your MIIIINNNNNDDDD. Yeah weird draft. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on April 26, 2013, 07:30:05 PM The NY Jets now officially have 5 backup QBs.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ratadm on April 26, 2013, 09:18:31 PM The NY Jets now officially have 5 backup QBs. That strategy ended up working out in Seattle.Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on April 26, 2013, 10:53:47 PM What is Jerry jones trying to achieve here exactly?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on April 26, 2013, 11:17:36 PM What is Jerry jones trying to achieve here exactly? Best i can tell he's just taking whatever guy he believes is best on the board, position be damned Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on April 27, 2013, 10:52:28 AM Except he's using his senile mind to decide instead of you know, professionals and scouts and stuff.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 27, 2013, 10:20:32 PM Except he's using his senile mind to decide instead of you know, professionals and scouts and stuff. So business as usual for the Great Jones. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on April 29, 2013, 09:08:06 AM The Jets waived Tebow. I actually feel sorry for the chap; most players who are complete busts seem to be both mediocre to terrible players and complete arseholes, whereas Tim seemed to have a great work ethic and athleticism by all account, he was let down by his lack of a throwing arm and the horrific mismanagement of his career by pretty much everyone around him.
Buzzfeed has a list of 11 lowlights of his season as a Jet (http://www.buzzfeed.com/ktlincoln/the-11-lowlights-of-tim-tebows-terrible-season-as-a-new-york), it's more sad than funny. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 29, 2013, 10:50:59 AM I hope that Matt Barkley enjoyed his senior year at USC. May this be a lesson to all idiots that think staying in school is a good idea when you're a projected top 5 pick.
Matt Barkley's $10 million year at USC (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/-nfl-draft/news/20130429/nfl-draft-peter-king-monday-morning-quarterback/?sct=uk_t11_a3#all). Quote Wondering what that extra year of school cost Barkley? He went 98th overall. Let's say he'd have been the eighth pick a year ago -- that's where Ryan Tannehill went. It's all speculation, of course. But the consensus was he'd have been a top 10 pick. Tannehill's deal: four years, $12.7 million. The 98th pick last year, Ravens center Gino Gradkowski, signed for four years and $2.58 million. Turns out it was a $10.1 million year of school for Matt Barkley. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on April 29, 2013, 11:10:44 AM Hindsight and all that...
Gambling is a hell of a drug to some people. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on April 29, 2013, 11:29:36 AM Unless you're Tyrann Mathieu, in which case marijuana is a great drug.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on April 29, 2013, 11:31:38 AM I feel bad for Tebow too. If it hadn't been for ALL THE ASSHOLES on the sidelines who continually hyped him over and over (Skip Bayless please choke on Tebowcock now), he'd have been able to fail and disappear into obscurity by now. But no, we have to keep talking about how he's a winner and how he's a Christian and a great young man and BLAH DE FUCKING BLAH. Meanwhile, even a no-name backup and Mark Fucking Sanchez get picked over him to play. It was an idiotic trade for the Jets to make in the first place, made more ridiculous by the absolute trainwreck they made of any attempt to use him in a role that would actually suit him. Denver really should have turned him into a tight end/fullback/tailback wildcard type.
I blame Josh McDaniels. May he rot in Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on April 29, 2013, 11:45:20 AM I hope that Matt Barkley enjoyed his senior year at USC. May this be a lesson to all idiots that think staying in school is a good idea when you're a projected top 5 pick. Matt Barkley's $10 million year at USC (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/-nfl-draft/news/20130429/nfl-draft-peter-king-monday-morning-quarterback/?sct=uk_t11_a3#all). Quote Wondering what that extra year of school cost Barkley? He went 98th overall. Let's say he'd have been the eighth pick a year ago -- that's where Ryan Tannehill went. It's all speculation, of course. But the consensus was he'd have been a top 10 pick. Tannehill's deal: four years, $12.7 million. The 98th pick last year, Ravens center Gino Gradkowski, signed for four years and $2.58 million. Turns out it was a $10.1 million year of school for Matt Barkley. The problem with that is the 'consensus' is frequently wrong. Who's to say he'd really have even been a first round pick last year? The 'consensus' was that Geno Smith and Eddie Lacy were 1st round picks this year and we see how that worked out. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on April 29, 2013, 11:51:43 AM It also seems pretty probable that money wasn't the only factor involved in his decision.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on April 29, 2013, 12:09:07 PM He wouldn't have gone in the top ten last year. There were already Luck and Griffin in that draft, along with Tannehill and Weeden and Russell Wilson. Oh, and Nick Foles and Kirk Cousins.
Going by yardage and ratings, I can say the only guy he would likely been drafted ahead of would be Cousins for sure. The rest all have better statistical years in 2011 than Barkley in either yards, rating, or both. That being said, nobody wants to see a QB take a step back in their final year. They want to see them improving across all years, and that's the risk you run. It's why a guy like Aaron Murray made a HUGE mistake in my mind, because he got information that he wasn't a first rounder. Hey dipshit, almost nobody was a first rounder in this draft, but I think he was a solid second round choice. If UGA does what I think they will do this season (get demoilshed by this absurd schedule early in the year), nobody will pay any attention to him. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on April 29, 2013, 04:15:27 PM The Jets waived Tebow. I actually feel sorry for the chap; most players who are complete busts seem to be both mediocre to terrible players and complete arseholes, whereas Tim seemed to have a great work ethic and athleticism by all account, he was let down by his lack of a throwing arm and the horrific mismanagement of his career by pretty much everyone around him. Buzzfeed has a list of 11 lowlights of his season as a Jet (http://www.buzzfeed.com/ktlincoln/the-11-lowlights-of-tim-tebows-terrible-season-as-a-new-york), it's more sad than funny. As a UT fan, I am genetically unable to like any Gators, but well said. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ginaz on April 30, 2013, 09:20:59 PM I feel bad for Tebow too. If it hadn't been for ALL THE ASSHOLES on the sidelines who continually hyped him over and over (Skip Bayless please choke on Tebowcock now), he'd have been able to fail and disappear into obscurity by now. But no, we have to keep talking about how he's a winner and how he's a Christian and a great young man and BLAH DE FUCKING BLAH. Meanwhile, even a no-name backup and Mark Fucking Sanchez get picked over him to play. It was an idiotic trade for the Jets to make in the first place, made more ridiculous by the absolute trainwreck they made of any attempt to use him in a role that would actually suit him. Denver really should have turned him into a tight end/fullback/tailback wildcard type. I blame Josh McDaniels. May he rot in The only place I can see him being useful as a QB would be within 10 yards of the end zone. He's pretty good at running at that yardage and he can throw some decent short passes. Other than that, he's a non-factor in the NFL. I also like how people are saying he might end up in the CFL, which is much more of a passing league than the NFL. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: taolurker on April 30, 2013, 11:50:29 PM The Jets announced they had a trade for Tebow IF he was a tight end, and Tebow refused... So basically fuck him, and his football career should end so his religious huckster one can begin.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 01, 2013, 06:51:55 AM You know why Antwon Randle-El was able to play for 8 seasons and make over $10M? Because he wasn't a stubborn guy who tried to shoehorn himself into a QB spot, even though that's what he played in high school and some of college. He switched to WR and had a great career in the league with a Super Bowl ring.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on May 01, 2013, 06:55:48 AM The Jets announced they had a trade for Tebow IF he was a tight end, and Tebow refused... So basically fuck him, and his football career should end so his religious huckster one can begin. I hope that Tebow likes arenas... or Canada. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: taolurker on May 01, 2013, 07:51:26 AM Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on May 01, 2013, 08:08:25 AM New design for Atlanta stadium. Build it!
The Occulus or the Solarium? (http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/falcons-stadium-ideas-don-t-just-push-envelope-123901552.html) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on May 01, 2013, 09:06:31 AM I just cannot fucking believe they are spending a BILLION dollars to replace a stadium that's barely 20 years old. Blank must have gotten real jealous of Jerry Jones.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on May 01, 2013, 09:07:41 AM I am hoping there will be a lot of moving parts involved.
holy shit, called it! http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/05/01/falcons-stadium-ideas-move-in-new-directions/related/ edit: just saw this story pop up on PFT. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 01, 2013, 09:11:18 AM I just cannot fucking believe they are spending a BILLION dollars to replace a stadium that's barely 20 years old. Blank must have gotten real jealous of Jerry Jones. Most of the city with a lick of financial sense is pretty pissed off about it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on May 01, 2013, 10:39:31 AM I just cannot fucking believe they are spending a BILLION dollars to replace a stadium that's barely 20 years old. Blank must have gotten real jealous of Jerry Jones. Most of the city with a lick of financial sense is pretty pissed off about it. aka everyone but the actual politicians who will end up approving it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 01, 2013, 10:50:01 AM They've already approved it. They are just trying to hash out the site, and exactly how many kickbacks/welfare programs they have to give to the county to get it done.
They are building these things in an era where the NFL is becoming more and more popular at home. I don't get it. There's no way the economics support this. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on May 01, 2013, 02:31:33 PM That 'Oculus' design looks like it was planned by aliens as an effective way to collect and process human meat.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on May 01, 2013, 04:57:49 PM Quote Enticements could include "impact seats," which vibrate on a large hit :uhrr: That aside, the Oculus design is pretty sweet. Shame you don't need it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on May 01, 2013, 05:35:17 PM Does it include Eregos?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on May 07, 2013, 11:43:44 PM Titus Young, professional dumbass. (http://tracking.si.com/2013/05/07/fomer-lions-receiver-titus-young-arrested-twice-in-15-hours/)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on May 08, 2013, 06:02:30 AM He's no Cliff Harris... :oh_i_see:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 08, 2013, 06:32:30 AM Titus Young and Calvin Johnson could be the best receiver tandem in the NFL if Titus wasn't such an idiot. They are both just ridiculously talented.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on May 08, 2013, 10:11:51 AM I knew he had to be a complete fucking muppet when he got released by the Rams only days after signing without ever seeing one practice. This just confirms the level of dumbassitude.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on May 12, 2013, 01:41:42 PM Titus Young, professional dumbass. (http://tracking.si.com/2013/05/07/fomer-lions-receiver-titus-young-arrested-twice-in-15-hours/) Trifecta. (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000168932/article/titus-young-arrested-for-third-time-within-week) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on May 12, 2013, 01:48:14 PM Seriously, any NFL team that gives this catastraphuck money should have their team seized by the NFL and sold off to the lowest fucking bidder. What a goddamn dumpster fire.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on May 12, 2013, 01:48:23 PM That guy's going from being a wide receiver in the NFL to being one in prison.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 12, 2013, 03:41:18 PM Just put him in jail already. This is only going to get worse if he's this stupid.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on May 14, 2013, 09:08:10 PM Titus has a mental disorder. (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9273307/titus-young-disorder-needs-help-dad-says)
You don't say? :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 14, 2013, 09:11:58 PM He's certainly crazy.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on May 15, 2013, 11:43:33 AM He's certainly crazy. Crazy has some benefit in Football. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on May 16, 2013, 02:25:03 PM (http://sinfl.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/desmond-bryant.jpg?w=618&h=309)
:awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on May 17, 2013, 01:37:22 PM Irvin gets 4 games for banned substances (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9287069/bruce-irvin-seattle-seahawks-suspended-four-games)
What?? A high school dropout with a lengthy arrest record (who also happens to be grossly undersized for his playing position) decided to do something stupid? Stop, the room is spinning :oh_i_see: This is all on Pete "The Retard Whisperer" Carroll. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on May 20, 2013, 01:34:00 PM So, Dee Milliner and Geno Smith have both fired their agents after being drafted by the Jets, just saying :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on May 20, 2013, 01:35:09 PM Wouldn't you?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on May 20, 2013, 01:35:42 PM Probably
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 20, 2013, 01:44:39 PM I tried to craft a joke, but the Jets already did that last season for me.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on May 20, 2013, 01:45:47 PM In the airless void of Jets's space, there is no humor. Only the sound of $20 million of guaranteed money being drained into Mark Sanchez's wallet.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 20, 2013, 01:49:21 PM He's making over $1M per touchdown, or $20M per butt fumble.
So far. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on May 22, 2013, 11:26:51 AM Crabtree out for the year with a torn Achilles. Gee, that is really too bad. I really like him and his coach.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 22, 2013, 11:34:10 AM Single tear from the Seattle fans I see. :awesome_for_real:
Maybe Dez will get away from his handlers this year so I won't have to watch him. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on May 22, 2013, 11:47:11 AM Jenkins better be able to step up this year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on May 22, 2013, 11:58:31 AM Not a big fan of Crabtree. Torn Achilles is nothing to sneeze at.
Why am I thinking hGH or steroids here..... :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 22, 2013, 12:18:34 PM He did gain 24 pounds from the beginning of college to the NFL, but I'm not sure you can count that as anything but training.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on May 22, 2013, 12:45:48 PM I'm sure he did none of that in college. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on May 22, 2013, 01:51:27 PM NFL still considering expanding the playoffs and moving to 18 games (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9301274/expanded-playoffs-18-games-mulled-roger-goodell).
Am I the only one that thinks this is a bad idea? The injury rate will undoubtedly go up as will the resultant use of PEDs. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on May 22, 2013, 01:52:43 PM No, it is an awful idea.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Azuredream on May 22, 2013, 02:02:26 PM Agreed. It's really annoying how they always bring up 'fans want this because they want to cut the preseason games in favor of games that matter' ..which I'm pretty sure is bullshit. Does anybody really want a longer regular season?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 22, 2013, 02:05:12 PM They've been pushing this for years, and they still don't seem to understand that this will make their product less popular. The NBA regular season is ignored because it's too long and the regular season doesn't matter. The NHL is ignored because the regular season is too long and doesn't matter.
Yet in a time when you are competing for dollars inside stadiums v. free TV, you want to add more meaningless games to the schedule AND water down the regular season importance? Why would I bother picking up season tickets to something that doesn't matter and I can watch for free? Why would I pay a PSL? Why would anybody show up to games or watch games when your team has clinched a playoff spot in Week 12 of 18? The NFL is like WoW. The only thing that can take it down is it's own stupid decisions and possible lawsuits. Oh, and don't think that them pushing for 2 more games in light of the concussions thing isn't a potential disaster for their case. The obvious solution is to just drop the 2 stupid preseason games and keep everything the same, but nooooooooooooo. There's profit to be had in those bullshit games. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on May 22, 2013, 02:05:17 PM Agreed. It's really annoying how they always bring up 'fans want this because they want to cut the preseason games in favor of games that matter' ..which I'm pretty sure is bullshit. Does anybody really want a longer regular season? The owners, FOX, CBS, and NBC. Aka the only people that matter. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on May 22, 2013, 02:08:47 PM They've been pushing this for years, and they still don't seem to understand that this will make their product less popular. The NBA regular season is ignored because it's too long and the regular season doesn't matter. The NHL is ignored because the regular season is too long and doesn't matter. Yet in a time when you are competing for dollars inside stadiums v. free TV, you want to add more meaningless games to the schedule AND water down the regular season importance? Why would I bother picking up season tickets to something that doesn't matter and I can watch for free? Why would I pay a PSL? Why would anybody show up to games or watch games when your team has clinched a playoff spot in Week 12 of 18? The NFL is like WoW. The only thing that can take it down is it's own stupid decisions and possible lawsuits. Oh, and don't think that them pushing for 2 more games in light of the concussions thing isn't a potential disaster for their case. The obvious solution is to just drop the 2 stupid preseason games and keep everything the same, but nooooooooooooo. There's profit to be had in those bullshit games. I'm still shocked that people pay much attention to the regular MLB season. I'm convinced it's mostly type A stat crunchers, like yourself. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on May 22, 2013, 02:10:30 PM You'd be wrong. There are way too many people going to/watching these games for that to be what's in play.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on May 22, 2013, 02:20:23 PM You'd be wrong. There are way too many people going to/watching these games for that to be what's in play. Relax Francis....I was just poking him the ribs. :awesome_for_real: Still, MLB stadiums are rarely full in the regular season though, hovering somewhere between 50 and 80%, depending on the team. Cut the season by 25% and they would probably be almost full all the time. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on May 22, 2013, 02:26:57 PM The empty seats tend to be cheaper ones, though. Filling up the stadium at the cost of fewer games sold to more expensive seats is a losing proposition.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on May 22, 2013, 02:30:28 PM NFL still considering expanding the playoffs and moving to 18 games (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9301274/expanded-playoffs-18-games-mulled-roger-goodell). Am I the only one that thinks this is a bad idea? The injury rate will undoubtedly go up as will the resultant use of PEDs. Awful idea. Keep it like it is right now, I think it's really balanced with play week and amount of teams. Two more games mean I ignore two more early season weeks. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 22, 2013, 02:32:26 PM Baseball runs mostly unopposed. That's why it does well, because it doesn't need one fan there every night. It needs 1,000,000 people to show up 2-3 times a season, and then watch the product on TV when they are at home at night. Also, summer TV for the most part blows, which makes watching baseball that much easier.
The NFL dominates the Fall unless it hamstrings itself, but there are competitors for your time during that period. You have college, you have NBA, you have NHL, you have vacations and holidays, and you have Fall TV programming. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on May 22, 2013, 02:35:45 PM Baseball, to me, is much more fun to see in person than on TV. Football is the reverse. I like to see instant replays and take a nap at halftime. Plus listen to Shannon Sharpe stumble over words. "JB..."
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on May 22, 2013, 02:37:14 PM Dodgers and Giants are each already over a million home fans for the season (I think today's game takes the Giants over.) For the Giants that's sellouts, for the Dodgers that's 75% of capacity. Good luck talking the Giants into a plan that loses them home games. Same thing with football teams.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on May 22, 2013, 02:54:18 PM Oh, it will never happen. It's an academic point, but it's likely that the quality of play would improve with fewer games as players would be less likely to get hurt and be more likely to give a shit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on May 23, 2013, 07:17:34 AM NFL still considering expanding the playoffs and moving to 18 games (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9301274/expanded-playoffs-18-games-mulled-roger-goodell). Am I the only one that thinks this is a bad idea? The injury rate will undoubtedly go up as will the resultant use of PEDs. No, you are not alone. It's a terrible terrible fucking idea, especially in light of the all the bullshit Goddell has been burdening the game with in the name of player safety the last few years. I'm all for shitcanning 2-3 of the preseason games since they are dreadful to watch. But adding 2 more games and more playoff teams? Fuck that. We had a 7-9 team get to the playoffs a few years ago. That is not to be encouraged. At least they won their game (BEAST MODE!!!) but still. You ought to at least be at .500 to make the playoffs. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 23, 2013, 07:47:20 AM And you would get some 8-8 teams in the playoffs if they expanded. You don't want it to turn into bowl games.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on May 28, 2013, 09:41:38 AM Draft moves to May in 2014 (http://nflcommunications.com/2013/05/28/2014-nfl-draft-to-be-held-may-8-10-at-radio-city-music-hall-in-new-york/)
The press release reflects a "scheduling conflict at Radio City", but the chatter seems to indicate that it's a "test". Besides, it's the NFL, who the fuck is conflicting with them, the President? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on May 28, 2013, 10:35:35 AM Draft moves to May in 2014 (http://nflcommunications.com/2013/05/28/2014-nfl-draft-to-be-held-may-8-10-at-radio-city-music-hall-in-new-york/) The press release reflects a "scheduling conflict at Radio City", but the chatter seems to indicate that it's a "test". Besides, it's the NFL, who the fuck is conflicting with them, the President? They must have some sorta contract with Radio City Music Hall. NYC has a ton of venues this can be carried out at. Hell, rotate it every year like the Super Bowl. Meh... now we'll be in the draft season even fucking longer. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 28, 2013, 11:20:18 AM It's the NFL trying to bridge the lull between draft and training camp.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sir T on May 30, 2013, 08:22:40 AM Its probably partially a result of the Rush Limbaugh school of conservative talk radio driving off advertisers and listeners, so radio stations, who are losing money carrying them, are moving increasingly towards sports radio in order to make some money. Unfortunately that demands more sports to cover to meet the demand.
I'm not actually trying to drag this into politics. But its an affect thats been noted through the entire radio industry due to the structure of advertisements and whatnot. You can read more here. mediamatters.org/blog/2013/01/01/rush-limbaugh-still-toxic-for-advertisers-one/192865 (http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/01/01/rush-limbaugh-still-toxic-for-advertisers-one/192865) Also http://www.sportsbusinessdaily.com/Daily/Issues/2012/02/14/Research-and-Ratings/Sports-radio.aspx Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on May 30, 2013, 09:14:51 AM I've noticed a huge push in sports radio here in Atlanta.
4 years ago we had two stations, 680 the Fan, and 790 the Zone. Both of these were on AM radio, and the signals were shitty depending on the part of town. Fast forward to 2013. We now have 4 stations, and 3 of them are simulcast on FM radio. So in that short amount of time, sports talk has gone from niche AM side to controlling 3 stations on the FM dial. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on May 30, 2013, 09:33:42 AM We now have 3 in Seattle. Figures- the market expands just after I quit listening. I used to listen to sports radio constantly. I can't stand it any more. Ignorant hosts and even more ignorant callers just drive me insane.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on May 30, 2013, 10:35:51 AM One of the things I don't like about sports radio is that they seem to always shout everything, always have music on in the background, etc. Everyone just needs to take it down a level.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on June 10, 2013, 07:35:09 AM I thought this was pretty cool over on PFT, voting for a Mount Rushmore for each team (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/search/rushmore). Basically, football nerds debat the best 4 players/coaches/owners for a team. Good luck on picking 4 players for teams like the Bears, Packers, Giants, Cowboys, etc.
It is about halfway done, but still fun for those eagerly awaiting September 5th. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 10, 2013, 07:50:33 AM Troy, Emmitt, Staubach, Landry would be my picks for the boys.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on June 10, 2013, 09:27:16 AM Jim Brown, Art Modell (part of me died saying that, but still...), Ozzie Newsome, Otto Graham - Cleveland.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on June 10, 2013, 09:39:42 AM The Packers are pretty simple.
Bart Starr, Vince Lombardi, Brett Favre and Reggie White. I mean, give it a decade and we may see Rodgers eclipsing Favre (though since he revitalized the franchise, I doubt it) but the others? Easy. Misses some great running backs and others in their history but it's not like you can take Lombardi or Starr off. And I'll cut the man who says Reggie White wouldn't deserve to get enshrined that way. Great football player but even more he seemed like a really great human being. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Merusk on June 10, 2013, 09:41:48 AM Jim Brown, Art Modell (part of me died saying that, but still...), Ozzie Newsome, Otto Graham - Cleveland. Art? Really? There isn't a player you'd stick in there instead?Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on June 10, 2013, 10:08:55 AM Jim Brown, Art Modell (part of me died saying that, but still...), Ozzie Newsome, Otto Graham - Cleveland. Art? Really? There isn't a player you'd stick in there instead?Art did a shit ton for the game and for the Browns prior to him taking his ball(team) and leaving. Maybe I'd swap him out for Paul Brown, but I think he'd be better on Cinci's Rushmore. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on June 10, 2013, 10:27:17 AM Troy, Emmitt, Staubach, Landry would be my picks for the boys. I did the same but had a really hard time putting Aikman ahead of Dorsett. Aikman was great and has 3 rings, but he had a lot of weapons to do it with. Dorsett had one ring but with a lot less to work with. It was basically Dorsett as a Rookie, Starbauch, and Drew Pearson. The Packers are pretty simple. Bart Starr, Vince Lombardi, Brett Favre and Reggie White. I mean, give it a decade and we may see Rodgers eclipsing Favre (though since he revitalized the franchise, I doubt it) but the others? Easy. Misses some great running backs and others in their history but it's not like you can take Lombardi or Starr off. And I'll cut the man who says Reggie White wouldn't deserve to get enshrined that way. Great football player but even more he seemed like a really great human being. I love Reggie White and voted for him on the Eagles Mt Rushmore, but I can't put him ahead of Curly Lambeau, Lombardi, Starr, or Favre for the Packers. I absolutely agree about Rodgers passing Favre, but just not yet as he needs a lot under his belt before people think of him instead of #4 when they think Packers Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on June 10, 2013, 02:17:35 PM Detroit Lions-Alex Karras, Barry Sanders and two kickers. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 10, 2013, 02:20:10 PM The Patriots are signing QB Tim Tebow and expect him to be in minicamp tomorrow (https://twitter.com/Edwerderespn/status/344198177118908416)
:drill: I can not wait for Brady of all people to have one bad game this season. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 10, 2013, 02:30:47 PM That's actually the one place he could go, and nobody would bother saying he should start.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 10, 2013, 02:31:41 PM That's actually the one place he could go, and nobody would bother saying he should start. I think you vastly underrate the idiocy of Tebow fans.Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 10, 2013, 02:32:25 PM If there's anyone that could find a decent use for Tebow it would be Belichik. He might even be able to convince him to play TE.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 10, 2013, 02:42:39 PM That's actually the one place he could go, and nobody would bother saying he should start. I think you vastly underrate the idiocy of Tebow fans.Ok not nobody. Nobody serious about football, and certainly not enough to cost a coach his job for not listening. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on June 10, 2013, 02:45:17 PM I think the Pats is a great place for him. There will be no pressure on him to compete for a starting job, no urgent need to make use of him to justify his existence, and Bill Belichek has a history of working with atypical prospects and making something of them. I can't see the Pats needing three QBs though, so perhaps this is a way for Bill to pull Tebow aside and convince him on the merits of playing a WR or TE.
Also, with Gronk and Hernandez both looking questionable for the season start, he could have a good shot at starting as a TE, rather than spending his life carrying clipboards. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 10, 2013, 02:55:51 PM What about Belichek somehow means he'll go to TE?
McDaniels drafted him to be a QB. He apparently pushed hard to get on the Pats. I'm not sure where this means he'll magically become a WR/TE. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on June 10, 2013, 03:00:44 PM The word on twitter from people 'in the know' is that he'll be doing a lot of reps at TE in training camp. Take this with a pinch of salt obviously, but it seems a better use for him than as backup QB. I haven't seen much of Ryan Mallett, but he seems no worse than Tebow, and not particularly in need of some competition. *shrug*
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 10, 2013, 03:11:26 PM The word on twitter from people 'in the know' is that he'll be doing a lot of reps at TE in training camp. Take this with a pinch of salt obviously, but it seems a better use for him than as backup QB. I haven't seen much of Ryan Mallett, but he seems no worse than Tebow, and not particularly in need of some competition. *shrug* Like WHO. I haven't seen a lick of "reps at TE". I'm not saying you're wrong, I just have not seen anything like that. Morte seems to think he'll be a QB, at least. (https://twitter.com/mortreport/status/344208627093102592) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on June 10, 2013, 03:16:28 PM Mike Freeman is on the TE train (https://twitter.com/realfreemancbs); obviously everything at this point is speculation though. It just seems that he'd make a more natural fit at TE than as a backup QB. Maybe a 3rd string QB, but do the Pats really need that roster weight? All passing aside, everyone knows that Tebow can run the ball with the best of them; he has the tools to be a TE, and that's driving the speculation I figure.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 10, 2013, 03:18:04 PM All passing aside, everyone knows that Tebow can run the ball with the best of them; he has the tools to be a TE, and that's driving the speculation I figure. It ALWAYS has been. The TE talk is not new at all. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on June 10, 2013, 03:22:28 PM Where did I ever say it was? I'm really not sure what you're getting worked up about.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 10, 2013, 03:30:00 PM Where did I ever say it was? I'm really not sure what you're getting worked up about. I'm not worked up at all. As a Broncos fan, I can't wait to see the hilarity. I just don't understand what's changed now that makes it anymore possible. I don't know why we give any credit to someone saying "He should play TE!" like it's some grand revelation. edit: I love you Onion. Patriots Sign New Long Snapper (http://www.theonion.com/articles/patriots-sign-new-long-snapper,32773/) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 10, 2013, 04:23:08 PM Josh McDaniels is the biggest nuthugger idiot in the league. He is absolutely worthless to have in an organization. If he pushed for Tebow, I hope Belicheat eventually pushes him off a cliff.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on June 10, 2013, 04:24:24 PM Rob Gronkowski is probably finished, sadly. So why not try out some more people for TE?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on June 10, 2013, 04:29:06 PM Why do we think he is suddenly willing to change positions when he hasn't been before?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on June 10, 2013, 04:30:34 PM Cause nobody wanted him at QB so he had no choice unless he was willing to retire?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 10, 2013, 04:31:39 PM Didn't Bill basically say in a presser he would only consider Tebow as a TE?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on June 10, 2013, 04:33:20 PM Well that's why we're speculating that, but I thought actually-involved people who know something were being cited, and I haven't seen a link.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 10, 2013, 04:35:05 PM Did they fire Mallet? Because he would be a better backup QB anyway. It makes no sense to have another SEC guy in the wings just cause.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 10, 2013, 04:35:40 PM Cause nobody wanted him at QB so he had no choice unless he was willing to retire? I think you undervalue his ego. Also, nobody wanted him because of the circus. There have been coaches/owners who wouldve been happy to take him as a clipboard-holder, but the circus is a nightmare. Didn't Bill basically say in a presser he would only consider Tebow as a TE? Bill said he didn't want him, most recently, per a "source". So who the fuck knows when it comes to "insiders" anymore.Plus the Patriots week-to-week injury report is full of crap. Also, there's no reason to believe he'll actually be on the roster come September. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on June 10, 2013, 04:36:32 PM Well that's why we're speculating that, but I thought actually-involved people who know something were being cited, and I haven't seen a link. I don't think anybody official has said anything yet. We may not know until he reports.Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on June 10, 2013, 04:38:34 PM Also I scrolled past Freeman apparently. Seems sketchy.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on June 10, 2013, 05:02:19 PM Rob Gronkowski is probably finished, sadly. So why not try out some more people for TE? That'd be a real shame, he's a phenomenal athlete. Maybe he can sit out on IR for a while and get fit. Also, nobody wanted him because of the circus. There have been coaches/owners who wouldve been happy to take him as a clipboard-holder, but the circus is a nightmare. Everything I saw after the Jets cut him was that teams were willing to look at him, but only as a TE; nobody wanted him as a QB, not even as a 3rd stringer. That's where his ego got in the way and he didn't try out for anyone. So either the Pats are willing to take him on a as a long-term development prospect, or he swallowed his pride and is willing to take a shot at TE on a team which knows how to use them well, and which would offer him cover to develop. Until some reports come out of camps we're not going to be able to say really. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 10, 2013, 08:58:27 PM I expect that the Patriots will have him throw the ball some and run some.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on June 10, 2013, 11:44:15 PM As much as I hate to say it, if there is anyone that can get something useful out of Tebow, it is Bill. He may also be the one person who can convince Tebow to play TE. I wouldn't be surprised if by this time next year we were talking about 5+ touchdown-catching TE Tebow. That's not a prediction, it just wouldn't surprise me.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on June 11, 2013, 02:45:53 AM That's the most likely scenario to me. Jason Witten is revered in Dallas, why not Tebow in NE?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on June 11, 2013, 08:15:27 AM Did they fire Mallet? Because he would be a better backup QB anyway. It makes no sense to have another SEC guy in the wings just cause. They released Mike Kafka and kept Ryan Mallet. Currently, Tebow is #3 on the depth chart I must admit, I preferred slow/no NFL news to having so many stories about someone so irrelevant. Congrats to the most talked about practice squad QB, he seriously landed a sweet gig. He is a practice tool for teams to learn how to defend against mobile QBs but he's on a team which will only face 1 mobile QB this season. I'm fairly certain that my place kicker in Super Tecmo Bowl 3 will get more field time then Tebow gets practice time this year Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on June 11, 2013, 09:35:10 AM Josh McDaniels is the biggest nuthugger idiot in the league. He is absolutely worthless to have in an organization. If he pushed for Tebow, I hope Belicheat eventually pushes him off a cliff. I just wanted this repeated because fuck Josh McDaniels. He is a twat of the highest order and he's still getting the joke on us with Tebow stories in the news how many years later? Tebow would be a great weapon as a TE/WR/HB decoy who could take a snap directly and be something of a danger to throw or just run the ball. I think he'd be a great pass catcher in the flats. The fact that no coach has sat the kid down and said "You are a dumpster fire as a QB and if you don't accept this role I have for you, you can go back to preaching to elementary school kids about the virtues of abstinence in some podunk shithole for the rest of your fucking life" and then actually backed it up is a tragedy. Assholes like Skip Bayless who continually fellate him and make him think he can play QB in the NFL should be forced to pay his fucking salary. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 11, 2013, 02:20:09 PM Timmy's deal has no guaranteed money. Unless something magical happens (including him finding it in himself to convert to TE), I bet he doesn't even make the roster.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 11, 2013, 02:22:03 PM Timmy's deal has no guaranteed money. Unless something magical happens (including him finding it in himself to convert to TE), I bet he doesn't even make the roster. They don't really have any use for him as a scout guy because I don't think they play many teams with mobile QBs. I doubt he'll take the field for more than 10 plays if he does make the roster. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 11, 2013, 02:22:20 PM I bet he will, even if it's just for the fan draw.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 11, 2013, 02:24:27 PM Yeah the Patriots are having a tough time getting people to pay attention to them.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on June 11, 2013, 02:25:19 PM Tebow fans are more trouble than they're worth, too.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 11, 2013, 02:30:53 PM Yeah the Patriots are having a tough time getting people to pay attention to them. Yeah, such a small market team. I mean, how many games do they get televised a year? Maybe 1? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 11, 2013, 02:44:06 PM Don't underestimate the power of God. :oh_i_see:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: El Gallo on June 11, 2013, 03:20:53 PM They don't really have any use for him as a scout guy because I don't think they play many teams with mobile QBs. The Bills when EJ takes the reins and leads Canamerica's team to the top! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 11, 2013, 03:32:21 PM Don't underestimate the power of God. :oh_i_see: Rememeber, Broncos fan here. I remember. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 11, 2013, 03:34:00 PM I'm sure you're "Tebowing" right now. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 19, 2013, 08:31:04 AM Okay, maybe Tebow WILL end up at TE just out of attrition. (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/06/19/report-hernandez-not-ruled-out-as-suspect-in-murder-case/)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 20, 2013, 08:05:03 AM Hernandex to be arrested. (http://www.csnne.com/blog/patriots-talk/report-hernandez-be-arrested)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 20, 2013, 08:05:48 AM Tebow works in mysterious ways.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 20, 2013, 08:07:42 AM Tebow works in mysterious ways. That TE depth charter is looking preeeeetty shallow at the moment. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 20, 2013, 08:14:57 AM What the fuck. :oh_i_see:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on June 20, 2013, 11:26:38 PM I am going to amend my "Tim Tebow, 5 TDs" semi-prediction from a page or two ago. Clearly now he can catch 10 TDs.
With this Hernandez thing and Gronk's injury problems likely ruining his career...I mean, it seems pretty clear to me that God must also be a Tebow fan. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on June 21, 2013, 02:41:48 AM Look Tebow, god killed a man to open up a spot for you at tight end. Do His will.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 21, 2013, 09:21:34 AM Via Adam Schefter on twitter:
Update: Police have prepared arrest warrant for Patriots TE Aaron Hernandez for obstruction of justice, per ABC News. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/348098424308109312) And then.. lawl... Should Aaron Hernandez be unable to start season, Patriots could open 2013 with their 5 leading receivers from 2012 not in lineup. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/348111710667812864) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on June 21, 2013, 09:37:44 AM Fuck the Patriots. Let Tommy Goodhair throw TD's to the practice squad.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 21, 2013, 09:52:46 AM Fuck the Patriots. Let Tommy Goodhair throw TD's to the practice squad. And knowing how "plug and play" works for the Patriots, that'll be somehow 55 TDs this season. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on June 21, 2013, 09:55:12 AM What I really want is for Brady to suffer a season-ending vagina sprain, have their backup get injured as well so that they are forced to start Tebow at QB.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 21, 2013, 10:56:36 AM What I really want is for Brady to suffer a season-ending vagina sprain, have their backup get injured as well so that they are forced to start Tebow at QB. I've given up hating Brady. He's not winning another Super Bowl any time soon, so it's not worth my time. That team has abandoned defense for so long, I don't really think they have a chance again short of cheating. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on June 21, 2013, 11:48:00 AM Honestly, I don't hate Brady. But I'm damn sick of Hobo Bill.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 21, 2013, 12:57:21 PM Honestly, I don't hate Brady. But I'm damn sick of Hobo Bill. I hope Tebow smites him with his sword of righteousness! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 26, 2013, 07:27:35 AM Aaron Hernandez released. (https://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/349896432918077441)
(He was also lead from his house in handcuffs today.) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 26, 2013, 07:30:18 AM He's going to prison. The case looks really REALLY bad on paper, and several sources coming out of Florida that are good friends with the local radio hacks here said in the past, "They were hoping this guy left Florida before he exploded. He is not a good dude."
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on June 26, 2013, 08:54:21 AM Damn! :ye_gods: When this story first broke, I was kind of :headscratch: but now it's starting to sound like dude is just a fucking trainwreck that finally happened. :uhrr:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on June 26, 2013, 09:13:26 AM To paraphrase someone on Twitter- I can't wait until he pins this on his buddies, finds God, and start starts doing annoying fucking dances when he is introduced at home games. :oh_i_see:
Pats obviously know something everyone else doesn't yet to release him though. I would be very surprised if they would have dumped him over an obstruction arraignment. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on June 26, 2013, 09:20:50 AM Yeah, the Pats aren't going to release a guy who can still play unless he fucking killed a dude.
Hobo Bill must know a thing or two about strangling homeless dudes near the railroad tracks. He can probably spot a killer a mile away. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on June 26, 2013, 09:37:28 AM Or just maybe they are a slightly classier organization than the Ravens
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 26, 2013, 09:50:10 AM Sure. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_National_Football_League_videotaping_controversy) :oh_i_see:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on June 26, 2013, 10:04:34 AM Or just maybe they are a slightly classier organization than the Ravens No, that's not it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on June 26, 2013, 10:23:37 AM Wheee...
Quote A Cleveland Browns rookie is charged with attempted murder for allegedly punching a man outside a club in northern New Jersey. http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/browns/2013/06/26/ausar-walcott-attempted-murder-punch-club/2459295/ edit: hit the wrong button before adding the quote... DOH! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 26, 2013, 10:25:21 AM Attempted murder... does not seem to fit that situation? At least based on that one bit of news, it doesn't.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on June 26, 2013, 10:34:54 AM Well if you punch somebody in the head and he ends in the hospital in critical condition that seems more serious than assault.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 26, 2013, 10:41:04 AM Well if you punch somebody in the head and he ends in the hospital in critical condition that seems more serious than assault. Attempted Murder usually includes something about... attempt. Like I said, with just this bit of news it doesn't seem like it would fit. I mean, maybe it comes out that he screamed "I'M GOING TO PUNCH THIS FUCKER TO DEATH", then sure. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: JWIV on June 26, 2013, 10:48:33 AM Or just maybe they are a slightly classier organization than the Ravens Yes, because Hernandez potentially actually killing someone is exactly the same as Lewis lying and being charged with obstruction of justice. :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 26, 2013, 10:58:01 AM The arrest warrant was for obstruction of justice for Hernandez last I heard.
So, technically, right now, the stories are very similar. Mind you, in the manner in which he was arrested seems to indicate very bad news for him. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 26, 2013, 11:15:22 AM Or just maybe they are a slightly classier organization than the Ravens :why_so_serious: :why_so_serious: :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 26, 2013, 11:49:48 AM Murder was the case that they gave him. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/349962007585366016)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on June 26, 2013, 11:54:39 AM He won't be a tight end for long. :why_so_serious:
I SO couldn't help myself. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on June 26, 2013, 12:37:12 PM I am about to pop a blood vessel listening to all the sports shitheads call this a tragedy. No, the tragedy occurred last week when a man was murdered. This is the beginning of justice, you assholes.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on June 26, 2013, 12:37:58 PM He won't be a tight end for long. :why_so_serious: I SO couldn't help myself. :grin: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on June 26, 2013, 12:52:41 PM He won't be a tight end for long. :why_so_serious: I SO couldn't help myself. He'll have to learn a new position: wide receiver. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 26, 2013, 12:54:04 PM I am about to pop a blood vessel listening to all the sports shitheads call this a tragedy. No, the tragedy occurred last week when a man was murdered. This is the beginning of justice, you assholes. Shakespeare writes tragedy, this is a reckoning. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 26, 2013, 12:55:09 PM I am about to pop a blood vessel listening to all the sports shitheads call this a tragedy. No, the tragedy occurred last week when a man was murdered. This is the beginning of justice, you assholes. I think you misunderstand. The tragedy about it is more headlines for Tebow. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 26, 2013, 01:06:55 PM I am about to pop a blood vessel listening to all the sports shitheads call this a tragedy. No, the tragedy occurred last week when a man was murdered. This is the beginning of justice, you assholes. I was just saying the same thing. You're spot on. I bet this dude skates. The evidence seems pretty circumstantial, now that he's destroyed it all. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 26, 2013, 02:29:04 PM I don't think you can really use reasonable doubt if it's known that you destroyed the evidence, and they have tape of you wandering around with a gun before you destroyed the evidence on the same day as the murder.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 26, 2013, 02:39:24 PM Well, I don't either, but I just have this feeling that a jury is going to like him.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on June 26, 2013, 02:40:24 PM The cops took their time with this one. I would be shocked if they went forward on murder charges with anything but a slam dunk in a case with this high a profile.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 26, 2013, 02:46:09 PM That's true. Still, when a jury and a sports star are involved, anything can happen. Just ask OJ.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on June 26, 2013, 02:47:19 PM He won't be a tight end for long. :why_so_serious: I SO couldn't help myself. Relevant (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMumMeljP9s) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on June 26, 2013, 02:54:52 PM That's true. Still, when a jury and a sports star are involved, anything can happen. Just ask OJ. Mass. jury and a guy named Hernandez? They should start fitting him for the jumpsuit now. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 26, 2013, 04:34:11 PM Plus, innocent people typically don't try to destroy their phone, surveillance, and top to bottom clean their house professionally all in the same day.
He's guilty about something. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on June 26, 2013, 09:48:53 PM (http://i.imgur.com/9ZfCSV3.jpg)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on June 26, 2013, 10:18:44 PM I wonder how often he'll go deep?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on June 27, 2013, 02:46:29 AM These prison sex jokes are getting tiresome. Let's pack it in.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 27, 2013, 04:54:12 AM Plus, innocent people typically don't try to destroy their phone, surveillance, and top to bottom clean their house professionally all in the same day. He's guilty about something. Well of course he is. But will a jury see it that way? That's the important part. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 27, 2013, 06:20:55 AM If he was still in Florida he'd have a much better chance. Their conviction rate is extremely low.
In Massachusetts? He's probably screwed. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 27, 2013, 06:28:45 AM Probably, yes. But it isn't over until it's over.
Seriously though, the guy is guilty as hell. And a major thug. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 27, 2013, 07:13:09 AM Hey look, more murder charges may be incoming. :oh_i_see:
http://www.myfoxboston.com/story/22702430/2013/06/27/source-hernandez-investigated-in-boston-double-killing Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 27, 2013, 07:35:03 AM Holy shit. That's big. If true, this guy is a major dick.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on June 27, 2013, 07:45:13 AM Holy shit. That's big. If true, this guy is a major dick. You don't know many NFL players personally, do you? Those that aren't assholes are the exception. (Ok... that or they're kickers/punters! :why_so_serious: ) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on June 27, 2013, 07:51:38 AM Chris Kluwe being the perfect example of this. That guy is all kinds of awesome.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 27, 2013, 07:54:37 AM The Onion cuts a little close to reality, once again. (http://www.theonion.com/articles/tim-tebows-former-teammate-charged-with-murder,32976/)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 27, 2013, 07:56:38 AM Holy shit. That's big. If true, this guy is a major dick. You don't know many NFL players personally, do you? Those that aren't assholes are the exception. (Ok... that or they're kickers/punters! :why_so_serious: ) No. Is that because they're thugs or because they're all roided out? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on June 27, 2013, 11:34:26 AM A big part of it is when everyone tells you how amazing you are for your whole life, a lot of the time you end up believing it. You see the same thing in any talent-based job.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 27, 2013, 02:26:15 PM Quote Massachusetts law enforcement officials believe Aaron Hernandez may have murdered Odin Lloyd because Lloyd had information connecting Hernandez to the double murders that occurred on July 16 of last year in Boston. http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/263797/police-have-possible-motive-in-hernandez-case http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/06/27/former-patriots-player-aaron-hernandez-probed-two-more-murders-law-enforcement-officials-say/6PSjR68RBpguwcxmlXe2oM/story.html Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 27, 2013, 02:30:47 PM He's already going to prison for life if he did it, so pinning more bodies on the kid only provides motive. Unless there's some sort of federal charge they can up the ante on by serial killing?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on June 27, 2013, 02:35:20 PM The motive is the point, hence the update.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on June 27, 2013, 02:39:09 PM The motive is the point, hence the update. It's just an ironic situation that you have to find two more bodies before you even get to the motive of another murder. Murder begets murder indeed. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 27, 2013, 02:51:09 PM A big part of it is when everyone tells you how amazing you are for your whole life, a lot of the time you end up believing it. You see the same thing in any talent-based job. I'm sure that's part of it. However, I've been around lots of different groups with gigantic egos (surgeons) that didn't typically run around capping people. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sir T on June 27, 2013, 04:18:32 PM You don't need to bee beefed up on steroids to be a surgeon
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Fordel on June 27, 2013, 04:46:16 PM The Surgeons are just smart enough to not get caught. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on June 27, 2013, 05:14:29 PM Only some of them. "surgeon murderer" turns up a lot of hits on Google! And only some of them are related to Surgeon Simulator 2013.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ginaz on June 27, 2013, 09:07:23 PM You don't here too many stories of NHL players getting in shit with the law (MLB players don't seem to get into too much trouble, either) but why are seemingly inundated with criminal acts from the NFL and NBA on a regular basis?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on June 27, 2013, 09:18:28 PM Well, they should probably be arresting at least a couple hockey players per game for battery.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on June 27, 2013, 10:43:44 PM This guy is all kinds of dumb.
(http://i1094.photobucket.com/albums/i450/jmarko579/Aaron-Hernandez-Glock-Gun-Selfie.jpg) (http://s1094.photobucket.com/user/jmarko579/media/Aaron-Hernandez-Glock-Gun-Selfie.jpg.html) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on June 28, 2013, 01:54:24 AM A big part of it is when everyone tells you how amazing you are for your whole life, a lot of the time you end up believing it. You see the same thing in any talent-based job. I'm sure that's part of it. However, I've been around lots of different groups with gigantic egos (surgeons) that didn't typically run around capping people. Harold Shipman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Shipman) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on June 28, 2013, 04:20:06 AM Wow. You showed me an incident of a surgeon that killed someone! Awesome. :awesome_for_real:
I didn't think you could do it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on June 28, 2013, 08:49:47 AM Well, he's only the most prolific serial killer in known history
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 02, 2013, 10:52:14 AM Well, the press finally found a way to tie Tebow into all of this. (http://www.orlandosentinel.com/sports/college/gators/os-tim-tebow-aaron-hernandez-bar-fight-07022013,0,6747621.story)
Quote Tim Tebow tried to stop Aaron Hernandez from getting into a violent bar fight in 2007 while both were football players at the University of Florida, according to Gainesville police records. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 02, 2013, 11:11:47 AM Even Tebow couldn't lay hands on him and heal his rage. He is forever lost to humanity.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 02, 2013, 11:26:06 AM So he sucker punched a bouncer near Tebow in college?
Proof that he's always been a douchepunk I guess. Hernandez that is. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on July 02, 2013, 11:33:15 AM If I had Hernandez's haircut, I'd be angry too.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on July 02, 2013, 10:22:09 PM If I had Hernandez's haircut, I'd be angry too. Maybe, but at least you'd have hair amirite. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on July 03, 2013, 08:50:11 AM Maybe, but at least you'd have hair amirite. Hair fears the heads of powerful men! :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on July 03, 2013, 09:34:32 AM (http://i.imgur.com/Ykba6W7.jpg)
Low brow... but I don't give a shit :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 03, 2013, 10:23:12 AM Patriots cheat, steal, and now we can add kill to the list.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on July 03, 2013, 10:24:29 AM Patriots cheat, steal, and now we can add kill to the list. Does that put them even with the Ravens? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 03, 2013, 11:01:15 AM The AFC is a bunch of goons. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 08, 2013, 01:34:06 PM Deceased fan asked for Browns pallbearers so they can “let him down one more time” (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/08/deceased-fan-asked-for-browns-pallbearers-so-they-could-let-him-down-one-more-time/)
:drill: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on July 08, 2013, 01:34:54 PM Deceased fan asked for Browns pallbearers so they can “let him down one more time” (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/08/deceased-fan-asked-for-browns-pallbearers-so-they-could-let-him-down-one-more-time/) :drill: Yeah... thanks. :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on July 08, 2013, 02:34:16 PM Pure awesome lol :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 08, 2013, 03:10:18 PM That is so wrong. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on July 08, 2013, 04:12:17 PM Deceased fan asked for Browns pallbearers so they can “let him down one more time” (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/08/deceased-fan-asked-for-browns-pallbearers-so-they-could-let-him-down-one-more-time/) :drill: I am totally doing this when I die before the Seahawks win a title. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on July 08, 2013, 04:15:58 PM You all will rue the day... RUE THE DAY! DO YOU HEAR ME!
:heartbreak: Well at least they made the news... Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ginaz on July 08, 2013, 04:41:44 PM Deceased fan asked for Browns pallbearers so they can “let him down one more time” (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/07/08/deceased-fan-asked-for-browns-pallbearers-so-they-could-let-him-down-one-more-time/) :drill: I am totally doing this when I die before the Seahawks win a title. Leaf fans should consider it, too. :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Brofellos on July 09, 2013, 07:09:52 AM Patriots cheat, steal, and now we can add kill to the list. So they are basically the Lannisters now, right? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 09, 2013, 07:55:16 AM So apparently Robert Kraft has said he feels "duped" by Aaron Hernandez "if the accusations are true."
And EA has removed Hernandez from both Madden 25 and NCAA 14. You can still unlock him in NCAA 14's Ultimate Team (because that was already done before he ganked a dude) but if you unlock him, you really get Alex Smith instead. Dude. You got replaced by ALEX SMITH. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on July 09, 2013, 09:13:24 AM Dude. You got replaced by ALEX SMITH. Said no one ev.....wait, wtf. This is a new and confusing sentence to me :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 09, 2013, 09:17:18 AM I'd take Alex Smith over Romo right now. He understands how to actually protect the football. Throwing for 4,000 yards in the NFL doesn't matter to me if you don't win.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on July 09, 2013, 09:55:12 AM I'd take Alex Smith over Romo right now. He understands how to actually protect the football. Throwing for 4,000 yards in the NFL doesn't matter to me if you don't win. Last night Jaws stated that Romo has the highest 4th quarter QB rating in the NFL. Is this true? My beef with Romo is that he is wildly inconsistent. He shows flashes of brilliance one day and plays like a rook the next. It's a shame. The guy has some genuine talent. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on July 09, 2013, 10:50:10 AM I'd take Alex Smith over Romo right now. He understands how to actually protect the football. Throwing for 4,000 yards in the NFL doesn't matter to me if you don't win. I'd say that if I was the 49ers (or another team with a passable/good defense and running game) then I'd take Smith, if I was the Cowboys then I'd pick Romo. Almost 5,000 yards with 28:19 td:Int ratio is not all that bad when the defense knows you're not running the ball. While he averages just over 1 int per game, the big problem were mostly within 3 games (5 picks against Chicago, 4 against NYG, and the most critical were 3 against WAS in Week 17) . Though, look at 2011 when Romo had 5 picks in the first 5 games with their shit rushing game and then see Murray own the field which helped Romo only throwing 5 picks over the next 11 games. Last night Jaws stated that Romo has the highest 4th quarter QB rating in the NFL. Is this true? My beef with Romo is that he is wildly inconsistent. He shows flashes of brilliance one day and plays like a rook the next. It's a shame. The guy has some genuine talent. I thought it was like 7th or 8th so I had to look this one up - but yeah apparently he has the 5th highest QB Rating at 95.6 and the 6th highest yards per pass at 7.9 for NFL All-Time leaders. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 09, 2013, 10:51:40 AM Yeah when you're 28th in first half offense, it's not shocking that Tony's 4th quarter numbers are good. That didn't translate to wins.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on July 09, 2013, 11:33:15 AM No, that doesn't translate to wins. However, outside of 3 games it didn't translate to their losses either. I'd placea that blame on defense and a lack of a running game/play selection. That, and I'm more concerned about his final 2-minutes of a half than his first half stats which has been bad for what, 5 years now consistently versus one single season with bad first-half play.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on July 09, 2013, 11:38:20 AM Alex Smith was a great college QB. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on July 09, 2013, 12:00:55 PM A 49er / KC superbowl would be so poetic this year... :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on July 09, 2013, 12:07:03 PM A 49er / KC superbowl would be so poetic this year... :why_so_serious: If it happened, I'm sure Vegas would be paying 1000:1 to anyone brave enough to predict it in the preseason. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 09, 2013, 12:07:32 PM I'm interested to see how Kaepernick does for a full year of action. I'm not a believer in the highly mobile QB as a long term NFL plan, but it's fun to watch it play out. Were I planning a defense, I want to key on the SF run game and make him throw the ball 30 times. They ended up grinding down the Falcons because the birds couldn't stop Gore. That opened up the TE, and rest was just watching a team bleed to death.
Also, I think it would be extremely tough for SF to get back to the NFC Championship or Super Bowl for the 3rd year in a row. Not to say they can't, but the NFL shifts/turnover usually doesn't allow that anymore unless your division is a complete pinata (Patriots). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on July 09, 2013, 12:53:34 PM I'm with you on the mobile QB thing, though I'm warming up to it as they protect themselves more (Wilson did great at protecting himself and I saw enough throws to be sold on him longterm, but I'll be giving RG3 one more year to be completely sold as I want to make sure he has truly learned to protect himself).
If it happened, I'm sure Vegas would be paying 1000:1 to anyone brave enough to predict it in the preseason. :why_so_serious: I was thinking I may take those odds and throw $10 down, but then I remembered P Manning is in the AFC West (and I'm someone who believes KC will not be shit this year). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: jgsugden on July 10, 2013, 03:59:13 PM A 49er / KC superbowl would be so poetic this year... :why_so_serious: If it happened, I'm sure Vegas would be paying 1000:1 to anyone brave enough to predict it in the preseason. :why_so_serious: http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2013/4/30/4286942/2013-super-bowl-odds-49ers-broncos Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on July 10, 2013, 04:01:11 PM Quote New York Jets quarterback Geno Smith is a 5/1 favorite to win Offensive Rookie of the Year honors :awesome_for_real:Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 11, 2013, 07:36:43 AM Only if he's throwing to himself.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 11, 2013, 08:50:56 AM If I'm power ranking the NFC East I'd say it's DAL, WAS, NYG, PHL. That being said, I don't think anybody in the East is "really good." 10 wins could easily take this division again.
I think the Giants will be forced to rely on the passing game more than ever with the loss of Bradshaw, and that can be good and bad. It's good because I think Eli can handle the pressure. It's bad because I think outside of Cruz they have receiver questions. Also, I think the Giants schedule is easier this year in their games outside the division. The question for them is the defense. They lost Osi, and they may or may not have JPP healthy off a back problem. The defense was flat awful in 2012, and now you throw even more questions in the mix. It doesn't look great. Philly is facing a new coach with a QB controversy, and on top of that their defense gave up almost 4 TDs a game. It's damn hard to overcome that deficit even with the best offense in the league, and they don't have that. What makes it worse for Philly is that their schedule is front-end loaded with good passing QBs. Their defense will have to stop RG3, Rivers, Eli, and Peyton all in the first 5 weeks. They could very likely have a 2-3 record or worse right out of the gate. Also, I'm not entirely sure that their new head coach even knows what a real defense looks like. Washington faces three major issues. The first issue is how rush happy they are. While being #1 in the league in rushing yards, Alfred Morris is going to sneak up on nobody this year. People will be game planning to stop him at all costs and shore up the rushing lanes to make RG3 throw. The second issue is RG3's health. If he has any issues with injury that take him out for more than 3 games? Their season is likely over. The last issue is the defense. The Redskins have a large amount of rookie DBs, a guy in Orakpo coming off the IR in a contract year, and you have a battle of previously injured players in Carriker and Jenkins. Who the hell knows if this defense was bad because of just injuries, or if it simply going to be bad because the personnel was overrated? My guess is that it looks like a good year to throw on the Redskins. The Cowboys for the first time in a while have the fewest issues. They have a franchise QB with no controversy and a long term deal. They have one of the best receiving trios in the league with Austin, Bryant, and Witten which may only be rivaled by Atlanta and New Orleans. What they don't have is a consistent running game. They lack a tough rusher since Murray has been dealing with leg problems early in his career, and Felix Jones has left the building. That leaves the job in the hands of Murray and possibly Dunbar, neither of which excites fans. The good news on defense is that with the hiring of Monte Kiffin, the Cowboys are likely to get smaller and faster on D to stop the pass. The goal will be for Dallas to force teams to run on first down, and get an advantage by making teams do things that are against their nature. This will work well against a lot of pass-happy teams on the schedule. It also means they will likely lose both games against Washington, since they love to run the ball. The question is will the other wins make up for the head-to-head battle with the Skins? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on July 11, 2013, 09:06:52 AM David Wilson has the potential to be very good for the Giants. He's the main reason they let Bradshaw go. Well, plus Bradshaw seem to have foot problems every year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 11, 2013, 09:11:30 AM David Wilson has the potential to be very good for the Giants. He's the main reason they let Bradshaw go. Well, plus Bradshaw seem to have foot problems every year. He does, much in the same way that Dunbar has an upside for the Cowboys. However, with the physical nature of the league now it's hard to say how any RB will fare over 16 games without a track record. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 11, 2013, 09:53:39 AM They have one of the best receiving trios in the league with Austin, Bryant, and Witten which may only be rivaled by Atlanta and New Orleans. This is wrong and you should be ashamed for thinking it. The only one who is consistently good in that list is Witten. Both Austin and Bryant can be world-beaters when they feel like it, but have never played to their potential consistently. I think Green Bay has a better receiving corps even without Jennings. I also think New Orleans receiving corps is overrated mostly because of how good Brees is. Also, I really think Washington's defense was as bad as it was last year because of injuries. Carriker is really good. That said, I predict the NFC East will be trash this year, and that Washington takes it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on July 11, 2013, 10:03:41 AM Seattle has quietly put together a fearsome receiving corps..if they can get on the field (and stay healthy) together. Rice, Harvin, Baldwin, Tate, and Miller...quite a few playmakers in there. Even Jermaine Kearse can do some things if he can get his concentration problems solved. He should have been the best WR in UW history but was wildly inconsistent.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 11, 2013, 10:08:27 AM They have one of the best receiving trios in the league with Austin, Bryant, and Witten which may only be rivaled by Atlanta and New Orleans. This is wrong and you should be ashamed for thinking it. Statistically, you are simply not correct. Check the receptions and yardage of all trios in the league, you'll see which teams have 3 receivers in the top 25. I've heard nothing buy love from the GB fans that their receiving corp is underrated. It's not underrated. They get a lot of TDs because the Pack has zero running game, and because Rodgers is the best QB in the league spreading it around. The best example is OMG JAMES JONES LOOK AT THE TDS! Yeah 9 of them in 4 games, 5 in the other 12, only 1 in 2 playoff games. He's a good long option, but he's not a game to game dominator like other receivers in the top 25. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 11, 2013, 10:09:04 AM And you're trying to tell me that Austin or Bryant are?
No. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on July 11, 2013, 10:13:08 AM I mostly agree with Paelos, but it is definitely worth the note that Wilson does have a major potential upside thuogh he is unproven.
For WAS, if RG3 goes down then them having Cousins will keep their season afloat. It will also bring some pressure off of Morris since there will be a lot less QB runs to worry about as they try to improve coverage against WRs. It's more a matter of if their WRs can stay healthy imo. Philly is definitely the bottom rank here, but they'll likely be better than last year if the differences in preseason build up is any indicator - even with a QB controversy and a new coach the team is staying out of trouble and out of the news for dumb shit and may even be working together :why_so_serious: And yeah, Dal's biggest issue now is the question of whether Murray stays healthy or not and if not how good will Joseph Randle be (as Dunbar and Tanner haven't set a very high bar for him to beat for the backup role). Murray being healthy (or any run game) will keep Romo's ints down if previous years are any indicator. Their defense should be better under Kiffin and especially if Lee can stay healthy. Though, I have to put a big question mark next to their defensive line at this point as they convert to the 4-3 they may not have the depth of the NYG a few years ago, or Chi, or the ability to transition between 4-3 and 3-4 easily like Sea. And you're trying to tell me that Austin or Bryant are? No. Brant rookie year? No. Bryant second half of last year? Yes. Austin is great if his hamstring isn't screwed, and Witten is a freak of nature after the shit he played through last year and with that number of catches. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on July 11, 2013, 10:13:47 AM They have one of the best receiving trios in the league with Austin, Bryant, and Witten which may only be rivaled by Atlanta and New Orleans. Thomas, Welker, and Decker would like a word with you. All 3 WR are ranked in the top 25 for 2013. That's tough for any team to match. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on July 11, 2013, 10:13:59 AM Dez Bryant has the talent to be Top 25 (Top 5, probably). It remains to be seen if he can keep from pimpslapping his family members long enough to put together a full season.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 11, 2013, 10:16:57 AM And you're trying to tell me that Austin or Bryant are? No. Yes, they are. Dez Bryant averages 15 yards a catch man. Hate him if you must, but you're ignoring facts. He had 12 TDs with 10 of them coming in the latter half of the season. He went 100+ 5 times with one game over 200 yards against the Saints. Austin averages about 14 yards a catch. They were both getting first downs almost every time they touched the ball, 100 times in a season. Add in the TE and you have over 156 first downs for those 3 guys on the team. Jones, Cobb, and Nelson combined for 126. That's massively game changing over a season when you have that kind of trio. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 11, 2013, 10:17:39 AM They have one of the best receiving trios in the league with Austin, Bryant, and Witten which may only be rivaled by Atlanta and New Orleans. Thomas, Welker, and Decker would like a word with you. All 3 WR are ranked in the top 25 for 2013. That's tough for any team to match. That's a good point from the AFC side. I don't really watch them as much because we don't get many AFC broadcasts. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 11, 2013, 11:17:41 AM Dez Bryant has the talent to be Top 25 (Top 5, probably). It remains to be seen if he can keep from pimpslapping his family members long enough to put together a full season. This. Yes, Bryant has talent. But he has yet to show me he can actually be in the zone consistently game after game. He will disappear for entire halves, pop up for one catch, and then it's off to next week. There's a reason Witten gets so many catches - he's the only one that's consistently open. Miles Austin is VASTLY overrated. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on July 11, 2013, 11:23:12 AM Austin, Bryant, and Romo are all wildly inconsistent. That's the issue in a nutshell. Welker is the model of consistency and his stats reflect it. Same goes for Rogers. Steady production is valued in the NFL and the marquis players are mostly valued for their consistent play.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 11, 2013, 12:36:09 PM Miles Austin is VASTLY overrated. The stats don't back that opinion up, sorry. A TD catch by Miles Austin is the reason Cowboys won game 1 against the Giants. Miles Austin is the reason the Cowboys beat the Panthers in Game 6. Without him, it's very likely the Cowboys go 1-7 to open that season. He makes game-changing plays for the Cowboys, and he's a top 25 guy in receiving yards. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on July 11, 2013, 01:26:25 PM Miles Austin is VASTLY overrated. The stats don't back that opinion up, sorry. The don't, so here: He was 25th in total yards and 29th in times targetted, 25th in 20+ yard receptions, 32nd in average. I'd say him being a top 25 WR is an appropriate estimate but maybe 1-2 spots high which is a farcry from being "vastly overrated." IMO, Austin's inconsistencies come from an injured hamstring and being the #3 target behind Bryant and Witten (the 8th and 14th/15th most targeted receivers in 2012). The place he needs to improve imo is the YAC and reception percentage which is a combination of play calling and work with Romo As for Dez Bryant, he was more inconsistent in the beginning of the season (especially when he had only 1 target of 20+ yards.....wtf) but the 2nd half of last year he was nothing but consistent and solid enough to bring him to be a top 5 or 6 WR for the season (I believe top 3 for the 2nd half of the season). Over the entire season he had almost 70% reception percentage, which was roughly equal to Wes Welker, Andre Johnson, Jason Witten, Demarius Thomas - that is some good company to be in. Then, compare him to Rhoddy White (as they have the exact same receptions and are both #1s) and Bryant comes out ahead with a higher reception per target average, higher yards per completion, almost double the touchdowns and more yards after the catch with the exact same number of receptions). Then remember that he is playing with an 'inconsistent' QB :why_so_serious: Oh, and we have yet to hear about him being in trouble since the end of last season. He's kept alow profile since he had his unofficial yet official guardian/mentor/big brother/whatever, so I see no reason to not believe he'll be building off of last season. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 11, 2013, 01:31:28 PM When he's on his game (talking about Austin here). When he's not, he disappears and Romo disappears with him (or throws INTs). Rodgers got sacked 51 times last year, Romo 36. Yet somehow Romo threw 18 INT's to Rodgers' 8, AND Rodgers threw 39 TD's to Romo's 28 - and Romo had a lower YDS/A even with more YDS/G.
Just by sacks alone (and the fact that Green Bay took that many sacks yet had MORE rushing yards than Dallas) tells me that Romo is not able to target anyone consistently. Which means his receivers aren't getting open as consistently as the Packers' receivers are. Cobb had 104 targets to Austin's 118 yet he had more receptions (80-66) and that's Randall Cobb who was at no point the #1 wideout for the Packers or #2. Bryant had better stats than all of them but again - he disappeared first half of the season in most games. The Cowboys wideouts are overrated as that whole team has been for years. They aren't consistent enough to get the press and praise they have been getting. Witten, however, cannot be praised enough. That motherfucker is a beast and I'd love to have him on the Packers. And yes, I'd take Denver's 3 wideouts over Dallas any day as well. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on July 11, 2013, 01:54:09 PM Everything there just sounds more like Rodgers is better than Romo - there is no argument there. Rodgers puts the ball exactly where it needs to be just about every single time even when his WRs are covered without them getting open. Romo does have a a pretty good consistency (better than people around here give him credit for) but with no running game, a shit defense, and playing from behind most games he is going to throw more picks as he tries forcing throws than someone who is already slated as a future hall of famer that is playing with a lead and has/is a much better playcaller.
Additionally, if you look at the top 10 QBs by attempts or yards, only 2 had less than 10 ints (Rodgers and Brady). They are the outliers with Peyton Manning fresh off 4 neck surgeries on a brand new team with 11. Though, perfect agreement about Witten being a beast and Den's trio being better than Dal's. Fuck you if Witten (or anyone like Witten to fill in for TE) goes to GB :mob: edit: with Austin though - I really do think that is more play calling than anything. He is targetted in coverage and heavy traffic that he doesn't have much room, and his YAC reflects that. Him being on his game or not imo still comes back to the lack of a rushing game for Dal. Their offense is built to run a mix of pass and rush while GB adjusts properly to not having a running game and builds up yards while they have a nice lead running down the clock. Look at Romo over the last 5 years when the running game was better (not great, but much better) and his ints drop to 50% or 33% of what his 2012 picks were and Austin's stats are much better (outside of the Hamstring injury) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 11, 2013, 04:06:45 PM Haemish just hates the boys because he's a dirty packer fan.
Must be tough having the best QB in a league. Boohoohoo :why_so_serious: I liked the Pack to go the distance last year but they need to l2p some defense. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 12, 2013, 10:37:25 PM Haemish just hates the boys because he's a dirty packer fan. I liked the Pack to go the distance last year but they need to l2p some defense. Both of these things is true. Still doesn't make me think the wideouts aren't overrated. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 13, 2013, 07:48:17 AM I'll put it this way. The WR situation and TE situation is one of the last things I'm worried about this year as a Cowboys fan.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 13, 2013, 12:10:34 PM You could be a lot worse off at the position, I'll give you that. You could be the Jags, Raiders or Jets. Now THEY have fuckall for wideouts.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on July 14, 2013, 01:44:52 PM You could be a lot worse off at the position, I'll give you that. You could be the Jags, Raiders or Jets. Now THEY have fuckall :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 14, 2013, 02:25:04 PM The fact the Patriots get to play in that greasefire of a division is almost criminal.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 14, 2013, 04:00:04 PM You know, Miami might be good this year. The Bills may even be competitive. The Jets though... no. Just... no.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on July 17, 2013, 08:30:38 AM (http://profootballmock.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/DALLAS-COWBOYS-TRAINING-CAMP-CHART.png)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 17, 2013, 09:11:40 AM I don't see how following the Cowboys has been bandwagon since the 90s, but then again people are still butthurt over that dynasty. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: tazelbain on July 17, 2013, 09:17:18 AM JJ is the quintessential rich douche bag. I don't think ripping on him and anything associated with him will ever cease to be entertaining.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on July 17, 2013, 09:26:14 AM JJ is the quintessential rich douche bag. I don't think ripping on him and anything associated with him will ever cease to be entertaining. It could only be better if Trump owned and NFL club. (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/nfl/news/20130509/usfl-tim-tebow/) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 22, 2013, 08:44:02 AM This off season sucks.
Broncos LB Von Miller is facing 4-game suspension for violating NFL policy, per ESPN sources. Case currently in appeals process. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/359329491958513664) Edit: at least it's not PEDs, but pot + mdma/molly. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 22, 2013, 10:25:56 AM Summer of Drugs.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 22, 2013, 10:35:45 AM As far as OH GOD DRUGS go, I am so beyond not worried about pot and mdma, but the biggest sign of this is sheer stupidity, given it's right in the period of time when the NFL regularly test for recreational drugs.
Losing Dumervil, two executives popped for DUIs, now this. Just ugh. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 22, 2013, 10:37:49 AM Denver has an image problem atm.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on July 22, 2013, 10:49:17 AM Apparently the positive test was from his rookie season back in 2011? If that's true the league certainly took its time in suspending him.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on July 22, 2013, 10:50:42 AM As far as OH GOD DRUGS go, I am so beyond not worried about pot and mdma, but the biggest sign of this is sheer stupidity, given it's right in the period of time when the NFL regularly test for recreational drugs. Losing Dumervil, two executives popped for DUIs, now this. Just ugh. Weed sure... but X? That has such a short half-life and at most would be in your system 5 days. You have to be able to know some kinda testing is coming up so why chance it that close to the testing windows? I don't even.... :uhrr: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 22, 2013, 10:54:08 AM Athletes are dumb. Next question. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 22, 2013, 11:03:01 AM Apparently the positive test was from his rookie season back in 2011? If that's true the league certainly took its time in suspending him. I think that's being misunderstood. I think the report is coming out that he tested positive in 2011 ALSO, which would make, at least, his second offense, which would trigger the 4 game suspension. The first is usually treatment/fine. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on July 22, 2013, 01:51:10 PM Pot should be ignored, especially in WA and CO where it is legal. I would be willing to bet it gets written out of the next CBA.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 22, 2013, 01:59:40 PM Pot should be ignored, especially in WA and CO where it is legal. I would be willing to bet it gets written out of the next CBA. Not unless it becomes legal at the federal level. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on July 22, 2013, 10:58:19 PM Pot should be ignored, especially in WA and CO where it is legal. I would be willing to bet it gets written out of the next CBA. I want to get on board with this, but not sure if I can. Can your employers in those states still legally hold it against you if it comes up in a piss test? Sure, it is no longer criminal, but your employer can usually set higher standards than the law allows. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on July 23, 2013, 06:28:52 AM Pot should be ignored, especially in WA and CO where it is legal. I would be willing to bet it gets written out of the next CBA. I want to get on board with this, but not sure if I can. Can your employers in those states still legally hold it against you if it comes up in a piss test? Sure, it is no longer criminal, but your employer can usually set higher standards than the law allows. I think Employee contracts have to be rewritten as they stand on 'higher standards' now still. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 23, 2013, 07:12:19 AM Sorry, I don't want my players smoking dope so much that they can't stop for 5 days for a drug test. I don't care about all the hippy bullshit about what it does and doesn't cause, it's done nothing but exacerbate every guy I know who smoked it religiously into a lazy fuck-up. Even worse, you want these guys are peak performance and smoking in general isn't going to help that at all.
I'm not saying people can't smoke it recreationally, but that's not what I would expect of million dollar athletes who supposedly look for every edge to stay fit. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 23, 2013, 07:34:11 AM Well, if it was legal, and allowed there wouldn't be need for a test.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 23, 2013, 08:11:31 AM Well, if it was legal, and allowed there wouldn't be need for a test. The NFL could still restrict whatever substance they deem to be improper to the job. Any job has drug or alcohol policies, legal or otherwise. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on July 23, 2013, 08:24:15 AM I don't care about marijuana smoking, tbh, other than the fact that it is still illegal in some places and could actually (and shockingly so) land someone in jail in the wrong spot. It's entertainment. If they can be fried out of their gourd and still catch a football (Randy Moss, ahem) then so be it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 23, 2013, 09:24:57 AM Well, if it was legal, and allowed there wouldn't be need for a test. The NFL could still restrict whatever substance they deem to be improper to the job. Any job has drug or alcohol policies, legal or otherwise. Did you read where I said "and allowed"? You said "Sorry, I don't want my players smoking dope so much that they can't stop for 5 days for a drug test.", which is what I responded to. If it were legal and allowed, there would be no need for tests. That was my only clarification. The larger point from that is that there could easily be a similar policy as there is to alcohol under the NFL. If the player smokes too much and it affects his play, that's on him. In addition to that, you have counseling issues just as you do with alcohol. Which isn't any different really as it is now on that end of it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on July 23, 2013, 10:44:40 AM You know, if the NFL banned alcohol and instated pot instead it would probably help with their off the field violence issues. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 23, 2013, 01:37:56 PM Did you read where I said "and allowed"? You said "Sorry, I don't want my players smoking dope so much that they can't stop for 5 days for a drug test.", which is what I responded to. If it were legal and allowed, there would be no need for tests. That was my only clarification. The larger point from that is that there could easily be a similar policy as there is to alcohol under the NFL. If the player smokes too much and it affects his play, that's on him. In addition to that, you have counseling issues just as you do with alcohol. Which isn't any different really as it is now on that end of it. No I didn't see that. My mistake. My point about smoking doesn't really have to do with the drug test. If you smoke daily, I'm not sure I want that guy on a pro team. Nor do I want the guy who drinks every day. They are punishing their bodies enough on the field without the off the field poisons that will screw with your healing. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 23, 2013, 02:16:30 PM What are you expecting to happen if pot is legal, or what do you think a normal person drinks in a day?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 23, 2013, 02:31:12 PM What are you expecting to happen if pot is legal, or what do you think a normal person drinks in a day? If pot is legal I expect some NFL players will have problems with their newfound freedom in terms of making commitments. It's a multi-billion dollar business, and these guys are unfortunately mostly uneducated labor. Giving people that lack the tools to make good decisions even fewer restrictions isn't going to lead to the best behavior. That's why guys with alcohol problems on NFL teams right now usually get baby sitters. And when they don't you end up with situations like Josh Brent on the Cowboys. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 23, 2013, 02:40:00 PM That's fine, but that shows there is a need for education rather than outlawing it. There's plenty of people that smoke and drink that have no problem controlling that. The people that have control issues likely already do, and would have problems with something else besides pot if it didn't theoretically exist. That's largely my point, alcohol is not banned, why would it be bad if pot wasn't banned. It just seems you fear something apocalyptic if it was suddenly legal. The dudes that would have issues with it are already smoking it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on July 23, 2013, 02:52:12 PM (http://i.imgur.com/FKFT1oE.jpg)
As a Browns fan, I hate Jimmy Harrison and the Steelers. However, this picture is causing me some kinda of warped cognitive dissonance. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 23, 2013, 05:40:38 PM That's fine, but that shows there is a need for education rather than outlawing it. There's plenty of people that smoke and drink that have no problem controlling that. The people that have control issues likely already do, and would have problems with something else besides pot if it didn't theoretically exist. That's largely my point, alcohol is not banned, why would it be bad if pot wasn't banned. It just seems you fear something apocalyptic if it was suddenly legal. The dudes that would have issues with it are already smoking it. You are confusing two things. I have no real problems with pot being legal. I have problems with NFL players using it and pretending it doesn't affect them or their play. Everything you put in your body affects the way you live. Right now it's just one thing they can do in the NFL to regulate their players. Believe me, if the NFL could outlaw booze amongst their guys, they would. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on July 23, 2013, 05:55:18 PM It seems like that would be a self-correcting problem, though. If a player's performance is impacted on the field, he'll be replaced by someone who performs better.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 23, 2013, 06:21:50 PM It seems like that would be a self-correcting problem, though. If a player's performance is impacted on the field, he'll be replaced by someone who performs better. Possibly, but in a cap league if you find that out mid-season, you're boned for the year. Also, who's to say teams would bother replacing them? What if they sign a big deal and then hit the bong hard getting lazy and fat? Would other guys get a shot? What about dead money? Right now my understanding is if you volatile the substance abuse policy of the NFL enough, a team can void your guarantees. Tossing one more thing into the mix for NFL players to have out in the open without any fear of consequence doesn't sit well with me. Maybe it's not logical, but I barely trust them to be functional members of society even with the stuff we have legalized. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on July 23, 2013, 06:45:06 PM Possibly, but in a cap league if you find that out mid-season, you're boned for the year. Also, who's to say teams would bother replacing them? What if they sign a big deal and then hit the bong hard getting lazy and fat? Would other guys get a shot? What about dead money? Right now my understanding is if you volatile the substance abuse policy of the NFL enough, a team can void your guarantees. Well except for the possibility of voiding a contract, you don't need pot for any of that stuff. Nothing is stopping a player from getting fat and lazy after signing a big contract already, other than losing his job to someone who's not fat and lazy. Look at Chris Johnson, who's been terrible once he signed that big contract after holding out. Yes, they gave another player a shot at his job but Javon Ringer turned out to be not much better than lazy Chris Johnson. Point is, this is the NFL and players who perform poorly for whatever reason (pot or not) don't last long. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 23, 2013, 10:24:13 PM You are confusing two things. I have no real problems with pot being legal. I have problems with NFL players using it and pretending it doesn't affect them or their play. Everything you put in your body affects the way you live. Right now it's just one thing they can do in the NFL to regulate their players. Believe me, if the NFL could outlaw booze amongst their guys, they would. I am not confusing anything, my point is as Nevermore is illustrating as well, is that the pot isn't the real problem in that context. There's a reason why it takes the NFL three strikes to punish pot before suspension. As Tom Nalen (former broncos center) said this week, "the NFL wouldn't be able to field any teams if they suspended players for 1st time weed offense." Pot use isn't going to affect anything, or rather, will affect just as much as alcohol does. While the perception is that there is a MAJOR PROBLEM, in reality, it's still a very small portion of the player base that is getting in trouble. I'm just not sure why we would expect players suddenly to fall into REEFER MADNESS. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 24, 2013, 06:00:54 AM I'm not sure why you're giving them the benefit of the doubt on anything. NFL players aren't responsible citizens as a whole. Replacing them with other irresponsible people isn't going to make the league better.
It's not about reefer madness. In a metaphorical sense, it's the difference between looking the other way when your kids drink, and throwing a party for them in your house. There are unintended consequences to those decisions, and I don't think it would make the NFL look better or play better. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on July 24, 2013, 06:56:48 AM Well, they already look the other way on a lot of stuff. This seems like a small issue.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on July 24, 2013, 07:25:13 AM Probably old, but made me chuckle.
(https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/6809517824/hA4FABA36/) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 24, 2013, 07:47:50 AM I'm not sure why you're giving them the benefit of the doubt on anything. NFL players aren't responsible citizens as a whole. Replacing them with other irresponsible people isn't going to make the league better. It's not about reefer madness. In a metaphorical sense, it's the difference between looking the other way when your kids drink, and throwing a party for them in your house. There are unintended consequences to those decisions, and I don't think it would make the NFL look better or play better. Because pot is available now, and the NFL is actually quote lenient on pot, and it isn't happening now. Nothing about it being legal is suddenly going to cause all of the players to say "SHIT ITS LEGAL, SON? TIME TO BLAZE 24/7!". There are people that would do that, but guess what, those are the same people that can't control themselves NOW. You're belittling an entire group of people based on the actions of a few. They won't be able to help themselves! They can't protect themselves from the dangers of the deadly Mareejahjuana. It is an incredibly small issue. Especially over pot, of all things. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 24, 2013, 10:49:53 AM This is going in circles. I'll put it this way, NFL people hate distractions. That's like the one thing they try constantly to keep out of their teams, in whatever form. If I was running a club, I wouldn't want legal pot as another added distraction. I don't really care if it's being done illegally, I'd still want people that are dumb enough to overuse it and get busted by a test to be punished.
I don't believe you can have it both ways saying it's belittling the actions of a few, when in the previous statement you quoted a guy saying that the NFL wouldn't have a single player if they banned on a first pot offense. Overall it doesn't really matter because neither of us actually runs an NFL team. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 24, 2013, 11:16:26 AM Nalen's quote and my stance reinforce each other. Pot exists now and does not cause an overwhelming problem, other than getting caught, and then it's only because it is in fact banned.
If it's being smoked, and not a problem besides the people who smoke themselves stupid (which is a very small percentage), why is it banned? And if it's being smoked currently, and it's not causing enough of a distraction to warrant anything stricter than treatment/fines for the first threee offenses, what would suddenly happen if it's legal? Problem nothing other than a lack of stories. But it is going in circles, I just see absolutely no evidence that it causes a problem in general. I also think we just have very different feelings on pot in general. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on July 30, 2013, 01:21:42 PM Sounds like the Chip Kelley show may have more than just the opposing defenses (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9521983/refs-force-chip-kelly-philadelphia-eagles-slow-down) against him.
Quote Whether Kelly's fast-paced attack would work as well at the professional level as it did in college was one of the most intriguing questions heading into this season. However, NFL rules likely will force Kelly to make adjustments. Chip Kelly's offense, which likely will be directed by either Nick Foles, left, or Michael Vick, might not be allowed to be as fast-paced as his Oregon attacks. "We have to make sure teams understand that they don't control the tempo, our officials do," NFL vice president of officiating Dean Blandino told The Wall Street Journal. "We're going through our normal ball mechanics, we aren't going to rush [unless] it's in the two minute drill." I think this is going to be a raging dumpster fire of a disaster for Philly. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 30, 2013, 01:28:08 PM The Patriots already run a version of what he does. He consulted with them to put it in. I doubt the refs will cause a huge stink for him, but Philly loves to get their hurf in a durf because I think they all suspect this will be a disaster. You need a good QB to run that style, and a QB that can read things on a fly. That's not exactly the strong suit of any QB on that roster.
The reason this works in college is because college defenses in the PAC-12 are mostly dumb or terrible. In the NFL? Even the bad defenses are good. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on July 30, 2013, 01:28:47 PM The Patriots already run a version of what he does. He consulted with them to put it in. I doubt the refs will cause a huge stink for him, but Philly loves to get their hurf in a durf because I think they all suspect this will be a disaster. You need a good QB to run that style, and a QB that can read things on a fly. That's not exactly the strong suit of any QB on that roster. The reason this works in college is because college defenses in the PAC-12 are mostly dumb or terrible. In the NFL? Even the bad defenses are good. This will be a disaster. There is no way that he can expect to run a play every 12 seconds. The Eagles' players are going to get demolished. Also, Eddie Lacey looks like he's put on a few (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BQXgp2DCMAAUMOE.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 30, 2013, 01:31:03 PM I'll credit Deadspin for this one:
Counterpoint: He's not fat by Wisconsin standards Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on July 30, 2013, 01:36:01 PM He'll still fuck shit up.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 30, 2013, 02:04:57 PM Those pictures were really bad angles. If you look at other photos of him from camp, he looks fine.
Speaking of Deadspin, Counterpoint: Eddie Lacy Is Not Fat (http://deadspin.com/counterpoint-eddie-lacy-is-not-fat-954027200) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on July 30, 2013, 02:13:29 PM He looks like a lineman. :oh_i_see:
He's a big guy though, even while at Bama. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on July 30, 2013, 02:29:26 PM He looks nothing like a lineman. He looks like a fullback, maybe.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on July 31, 2013, 07:14:08 AM In that photo he could very easily pass for a D-lineman. That gut is enormous.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 31, 2013, 07:20:54 AM He's certainly bigger than he was at Alabama. The Packers are already talking about him being a "Big Back" and going with him in power situations. That's not how he was used at Alabama. He was busting runs at 7 yards a carry.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on July 31, 2013, 07:32:21 AM He was always a big boy though. And he's got quickness for that size that is atypical. Even with added weight he'll be fine.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on July 31, 2013, 07:54:14 AM But, again, that photo is misleading. It's a bad angle.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 31, 2013, 08:07:51 AM It reminds me of the angle on "Fat Chipper" at the beginning of his final season.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 31, 2013, 01:22:24 PM So about that Percy Harvin trade... (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp13/story/_/id/9522726/percy-harvin-seattle-seahawks-undergo-hip-surgery) :awesome_for_real:
Sorry, Way. Your team traded for a fucking fruitcake and he probably won't make it on the field much this year if at all. But at least the team isn't necessarily going to rely on his presence or lack thereof. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on July 31, 2013, 01:42:23 PM So, about that Niner/Seahawk wide receiver 'arms race'...
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on July 31, 2013, 01:58:59 PM I think both the Niners and Seahawks miss the playoffs. That division is going all RAMS BABY! :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on July 31, 2013, 02:00:36 PM Vernon Davis is apparently taking a bunch of snaps at WR in camp.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on July 31, 2013, 02:11:28 PM So about that Percy Harvin trade... (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp13/story/_/id/9522726/percy-harvin-seattle-seahawks-undergo-hip-surgery) :awesome_for_real: Sorry, Way. Your team traded for a fucking fruitcake and he probably won't make it on the field much this year if at all. But at least the team isn't necessarily going to rely on his presence or lack thereof. Seattle can't have nice things. That is pretty much what it boils down to. Our studly rookie catcher on the Mariners is currently broken too. I am choosing to see it like they drafted a bust like Lawrence Jackson or James Carpenter in the first round...it is survivable. Just means Tate and Baldwin (and maybe Kearse) need to step it the fuck up. Maybe all of them if Rice's vaginal treatments in Europe don't work. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on July 31, 2013, 02:14:23 PM Russell Wilson is pretty damned good. Don't discount that. I think Seattle will still be damned tough at home and suck ass on the road, just like last year, even without Harvin.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on July 31, 2013, 02:38:44 PM Well yeah. I mean, the team DID almost win the division AND win a playoff game without Harvin. It wasn't like they NEEDED him, but he sure would have made that division tougher for the Niners with Crabtree missing.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on July 31, 2013, 03:34:39 PM They still have a terrifying D.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on July 31, 2013, 11:16:46 PM Riley Cooper is a gentleman and a scholar. Fucking Florida.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/82533/88-o.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 01, 2013, 06:05:41 AM It's funny how you can really see into people's souls once they've got a few drinks in them.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 01, 2013, 08:18:13 AM Hmm. Apparently Alex Smith is the best quarterback in the NFL. (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp13/story/_/id/9527876/alex-smith-kansas-city-chiefs-best-qb-doug-pederson-says) Who knew?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on August 01, 2013, 08:24:54 AM I thought he got the shaft in SF, but will he succeed in KC? We'll find out. They have both a head coach and a QB that I think were "unfairly" treated in their respective prior teams.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 01, 2013, 08:26:35 AM I think he's probably decent, but best in the NFL is a stretch when you have the Mannings, Tom Brady, Aaron Rodgers, etc. in front of you. Being in the top 1/3 isn't bad though. I could place him there tentatively.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on August 01, 2013, 08:28:39 AM He's not the best by a long shot. That's just a fluff statement. If you're picking QBs for your right now and you don't take Aaron Rodgers or Drew Brees first, I'm looking at you funny.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on August 01, 2013, 08:40:36 AM Riley Cooper is a gentleman and a scholar. Fucking Florida. (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/82533/88-o.gif) Someone used the N word at a Kenny Chesney concert? Well I never... :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on August 01, 2013, 09:24:42 AM Apparently Chesney doesn't want (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/08/01/kenny-chesney-hopes-his-fans-arent-judged-by-riley-cooper/) his fans all viewed the same as Cooper. I was just thinking how sad it is how similar an NFL player is to a Chesney fan :why_so_serious:
Also, lots of changes to the Pro Bowl (http://nflcommunications.com/2013/07/31/2014-pro-bowl-presented-by-mcdonalds-features-new-format-for-nfl-all-star-game/). the tl;dr would be no more AFC vs NFC, teams are picked with the top two voted players of the year and 2 leading fantasy football players as captains and Jerry Rice and Deion Sanders will act as Alumni captains this year, lots of changes aimed at speeding up the pace of the game outside of the last 2 minutes of each quarter, no more kick returns, and defenses can play more than man to man and goalline schemes. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on August 01, 2013, 09:27:12 AM Still won't make me give a shit about the Pro Bowl.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on August 01, 2013, 09:30:32 AM I'll care about it when it's gone. Then I'll happy. Approximately 5 minutes later, I'll forget it ever existed.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 01, 2013, 09:33:37 AM What's the Pro Bowl?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on August 01, 2013, 09:54:33 AM These changes will make it so I might be curious how they play out and watch this year. Most likely I'll continue not giving a fuck.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on August 01, 2013, 11:18:04 AM I'm always shocked they keep trying to make this matter.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on August 01, 2013, 11:26:05 AM They won't be giving up the Pro Bowl because of $$$.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on August 01, 2013, 11:26:25 AM I'm sure they'll eventually make the winner get home field advantage in the Super Bowl or something. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on August 01, 2013, 11:27:43 AM I'm sure they'll eventually make the winner get home field advantage in the Super Bowl or something. :why_so_serious: Now what sport would be stupid enough to do that with an All Star game? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on August 01, 2013, 11:33:01 AM I'm sure they'll eventually make the winner get home field advantage in the Super Bowl or something. :why_so_serious: Now what sport would be stupid enough to do that with an All Star game? We're lucky that the Super Bowl is neutral, and planned a year in advance. Otherwise, they might be that stupid. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on August 01, 2013, 11:36:39 AM It's the NFL, they'd still mess that up and make millions by doing something like giving home field advantage to the conference of the player that sells the most pro bowl jerseys
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on August 01, 2013, 11:40:43 AM Can we replace the Pro Bowl with the Lingerie Bowl?
I might watch that. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on August 01, 2013, 11:50:59 AM I like the All-Star home field thing in baseball. Haters!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on August 01, 2013, 12:57:55 PM And still meaningless and now with no conference pride on the line... who the hell is going to want to play this? Unless the game check goes up, I just don't see why players would even bother.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on August 01, 2013, 01:02:25 PM And still meaningless and now with no conference pride on the line... who the hell is going to want to play this? Unless the game check goes up, I just don't see why players would even bother. They are trying to turn it into some kind of backyard pickup game it sounds like. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on August 01, 2013, 01:04:15 PM Might as well take the pads off and break out the flags. Linemen have to wear beer helmets.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on August 01, 2013, 01:05:18 PM They NEED to bring back the skills competition. Every other pro sport does it... IMHO, those are better than the game.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on August 01, 2013, 01:06:50 PM They NEED to bring back the skills competition. Every other pro sport does it... IMHO, those are better than the game. Yep I'd much rather watch a version of NFL punt, pass, and kick than the game. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 01, 2013, 02:02:54 PM Yeah. The Home Run Derby is exhilarating.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on August 01, 2013, 02:20:11 PM They are trying to turn it into some kind of backyard pickup game it sounds like. Yeah, pretty much. My thought is it's their attempt to tap further into the fantasy market by creating a live fantasy game. Also, new jerseys/helmets to sell to the people who buy up anything and everything about certain players. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on August 01, 2013, 02:31:31 PM Sadly, that jersey shit works. Those things sell, and every time I see them I want to punch the dude wearing it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on August 01, 2013, 02:46:14 PM I try to think of it like this-r every stupid licensed jersey someone buys is that much more money toward keeping ticket prices down and (most) games on free broadcast TV.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on August 01, 2013, 04:25:53 PM Sadly, that jersey shit works. Those things sell, and every time I see them I want to punch the dude wearing it. You have no idea how eager I am to get a Tebow New England jersey. The amount of mad it'll generate will be truly prodigious. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on August 01, 2013, 04:28:32 PM Especially after he scores the winning touchdown in the playoffs to eliminate Denver from the SuperBowl. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on August 02, 2013, 02:09:29 PM The new Pro Bowl format would be improved if all the players had to line up and the two captains got to take turns picking who played for them in front of the crowd. High-school physical education class all over again!
I wonder who'd get picked last. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on August 02, 2013, 02:16:51 PM The punters.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Threash on August 02, 2013, 02:29:36 PM Riley Cooper will fight... (https://mobile.twitter.com/search?had_popular=true&q=RileyCooperwillfight)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on August 02, 2013, 03:16:46 PM The punters. They still have those in the newfangled Grudenbowl? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on August 05, 2013, 04:10:32 PM Packers' Bryan Bulaga tears ACL (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp13/story/_/id/9540377/green-bay-packers-left-tackle-bryan-bulaga-season)
That is going to be pretty big if the other guys can't fill in adequately. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on August 05, 2013, 04:20:24 PM Packers' Bryan Bulaga tears ACL (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp13/story/_/id/9540377/green-bay-packers-left-tackle-bryan-bulaga-season) That is going to be pretty big if the other guys can't fill in adequately. I can answer that questions already. The other guys? They can't fill in. Bulaga was the best tackle on that fucking team. The other guys were adequate at best when healthy and they haven't been that. The Packers better use some of that goddamn cap space and find a decent left tackle fucking somewhere, because if Rodgers is going to have to run for his fucking life again this year, they are going to cap out at a 1 and done playoff run. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on August 05, 2013, 04:23:22 PM Packers' Bryan Bulaga tears ACL (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp13/story/_/id/9540377/green-bay-packers-left-tackle-bryan-bulaga-season) That is going to be pretty big if the other guys can't fill in adequately. I can answer that questions already. The other guys? They can't fill in. Bulaga was the best tackle on that fucking team. The other guys were adequate at best when healthy and they haven't been that. The Packers better use some of that goddamn cap space and find a decent left tackle fucking somewhere, because if Rodgers is going to have to run for his fucking life again this year, they are going to cap out at a 1 and done playoff run. You guys can have Joe Thomas for this year but only if you swap team names as well. /cry Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 06, 2013, 06:46:51 AM Wow. Vince Young signs with the Packers (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp13/story/_/id/9541421/green-bay-packers-sign-vince-young-workout-source-says). I'm baffled, but happy for the guy. Watch Aaron Rodgers get an ACL now....
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on August 06, 2013, 08:17:46 AM Quote The Packers also are intrigued with Young's mobility and believe he can help prepare them for the opening two games of the regular season, in which Green Bay's defense plays against San Francisco's Colin Kaepernick and Washington's Robert Griffin III. Is this just pure delusion or just bullshit to feed the press? You decide. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 06, 2013, 08:28:43 AM Vince might have been able to pull that off 10 years ago if he would have had his head screwed on straight. Not much hope of that now. In fact, there's not much hope of him making the final roster, IMO.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on August 06, 2013, 08:50:19 AM Wow. Vince Young signs with the Packers (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp13/story/_/id/9541421/green-bay-packers-sign-vince-young-workout-source-says). I'm baffled, but happy for the guy. Watch Aaron Rodgers get an ACL now.... I really wish the goddamn Packers had spent the money they wasted on VY on a goddamn left tackle. I dread the day this fuckup gets into the Packers lineup. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 06, 2013, 08:54:57 AM I honestly think you'd be better throwing Randall Cobb in at quarterback, if it came to VY playing.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 06, 2013, 09:07:19 AM Vince Young wasn't THAT bad.
But, the Pack has some cap room, but let me tell you, as a Broncos fan (we're having some issues there right now too), the O-Line market out there is REAAAAALLY thin. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 06, 2013, 10:07:28 AM Cobb is a badass. He could pull it off, in a short term. VY has been out of the game for too long. He used to be good but who fucking knows now? Seems like a big risk to me.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 06, 2013, 10:14:25 AM Well, look at it this way, the organization hired him for a REASON, which seems to indicate they don't have a lot of faith in the other QBs on the roster. Also, tangently, Cobb got injured today.
Also, it's only a "big risk" if the money is a lot. Otherwise it's just depth. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 06, 2013, 10:24:56 AM Fuck. I love Cobb.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on August 06, 2013, 11:00:30 AM Wow. Vince Young signs with the Packers (http://espn.go.com/nfl/trainingcamp13/story/_/id/9541421/green-bay-packers-sign-vince-young-workout-source-says). I'm baffled, but happy for the guy. Watch Aaron Rodgers get an ACL now.... I really wish the goddamn Packers had spent the money they wasted on VY on a goddamn left tackle. I dread the day this fuckup gets into the Packers lineup. What left tackle should they have spent money on? The Dolphins spend an ungodly amount of money on free agents this off season and still couldn't find a left tackle. There just isn't anything worthwhile out there. Only way they could actually upgrade that position would be to swing some kind of trade, but good luck getting anyone decent without paying a hefty amount. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on August 06, 2013, 11:48:51 AM As much as I love all this recent Packer news (update: Nelson is out for the rest of camp now as well), their only option would be to try and pick up a decent right tackle who could switch sides. That is pretty unlikely with how thin the market is right now, and as Nevermore points out - even shitloads of money was making it difficult to land a decent to good LT (though his example using the Dolphins is flawed as money only goes so far in bringing in talent to the Dolphins :why_so_serious:).
As for VY, I'm not completely sold on the thought that the Pack picking up VY as a practice dummy against mobile QBs. I'm simply not sure he's up to par to even play the dummy role compared to the current lineup of mobile QBs (especially compared to the ones the Packers actually play with RG3 and Kaep in weeks 1 and 2 respectively and Vick if he's starting/not-injured later in the season). edit: more on the O-line spoilered, mostly ramblings Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 06, 2013, 11:51:07 AM The Manning Brothers have done a r&b video for DirecTV.
http://ftw.usatoday.com/2013/08/peyton-manning-directv-commercial-eli-manning/ :drill: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 06, 2013, 12:12:04 PM Philadelphia Fans Excited To Have One Of Their Own Playing For Eagles (http://www.theonion.com/articles/philadelphia-fans-excited-to-have-one-of-their-own,33386/) via The Onion.
I love it when The Onion goes trolling. :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on August 06, 2013, 12:26:27 PM If you read Deadspin then this might be old news, but if you buy the Madden 25 Anniversary Edition for $100 you get a code to watch all NFL Sunday afternoon games on PC/tablet. It is like getting DirecTv NFL Ticket for $40. I do not own a console and have no intention of buying one, but I AM buying this game. If anyone wants to buy the actual game from me after I use the code, let me know.
Use the f13.net Amazon link. http://kotaku.com/the-cheapest-way-to-watch-the-nfl-this-year-1041559197 Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 06, 2013, 12:33:35 PM I'd be interested if it included playback on a console, but i'm not carting my computer to the living room.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 06, 2013, 12:36:48 PM Don't you have iPad or equivalent?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on August 06, 2013, 12:41:16 PM I'd be interested if it included playback on a console, but i'm not carting my computer to the living room. I have a PC in my living room, but I don't trust the "Only offered if DirecTV isn't available in your area" fine print. They say: Not sure if I want to gamble $100 on it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 06, 2013, 12:57:10 PM Don't you have iPad or equivalent? An iPad is not my big screen TV. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 06, 2013, 12:58:47 PM No, but it's better than nothing. Sounds like the fine print would fuck you anyway though.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 06, 2013, 01:02:56 PM Especially since I HAVE DirecTV.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on August 06, 2013, 01:21:15 PM Tell them you have a tree in your yard that blocks the satellite exposure. That is what they always tell me when I want to tell Comcast to get fucked :cry:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 06, 2013, 01:24:32 PM No, but it's better than nothing. Sounds like the fine print would fuck you anyway though. No, watching on the computer would be better. Larger screen, better sound. I want to sit on my ass on sundays and drink beer in the comfy chair. IS THAT TOO MUCH TO ASK, GHOST. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 06, 2013, 01:43:52 PM Tell them you have a tree in your yard that blocks the satellite exposure. That is what they always tell me when I want to tell Comcast to get fucked :cry: They make chainsaws. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 08, 2013, 07:50:45 AM I used to be a big fan of Wes Welker, but now he just sounds like a whiney fuck (http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/9548477/wes-welker-says-bill-belichick-chided-front-new-england-patriots-teammates).
Quote Denver Broncos wide receiver Wes Welker told Sports Illustrated that Bill Belichick was hard on him toward the end of his six-year run in New England, chiding him in front of teammates in a way the coach hadn't done previously. "It was just kind of hard," Welker told the magazine in a story that appears in this week's edition, "one of those deals where you have to endure him, put up with him. ... But he does it to everybody. It's the way he is." This is major douchebag type stuff. The way he played his last couple of years in NE, particularly in crucial situations, he needed to be fucked with. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on August 08, 2013, 07:51:39 AM He would have been better off saying nothing.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 08, 2013, 07:53:15 AM Of course he would have. He was trying to needle Belicheck, but came off sounding like a major wank.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on August 08, 2013, 07:54:09 AM He would have been better off saying nothing. This. Waaaah my boss was mean to me while I was making a bajillion dollars waaaaah Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 08, 2013, 07:55:29 AM I wonder what he's going to say when Peyton Manning tells him to eat a dick after he drops another wide open game winning touchdown pass?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on August 08, 2013, 04:27:58 PM Eh, the writer makes him sound more of a whiny bitch than what he is actually saying imo.
But yeah, keeping quiet will usually be the smart move Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on August 09, 2013, 02:41:02 AM I wonder what he's going to say when Peyton Manning tells him to eat a dick after he drops another wide open game winning touchdown pass? Exactly. Peyton yells at you on the field with all the cameras on. It's amusing. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on August 09, 2013, 06:09:45 AM When I heard those comments, I actually took it totally the other way. It was kind of nice to hear someone say what they felt. Essentially he just found a polite way of saying that Belichek's an asshole. Which I've always kind of had the impression is an accurate statement.
I'd rather hear that than the typical stock interview bullshit I expected we'd get. The interviewer asked him for his opinion, and he gave an honest one. That's refreshing in sports. It would be one thing if it was some washout making these complaints, trying to put his failure on the coach. That's not the case here. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on August 09, 2013, 08:24:37 AM Another former NFL player dies young, brain damage identified during autopsy (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1732157-former-ravens-qb-cullen-finnertys-autopsy-reveals-cte)
This guy didn't even play that much, and didn't have much of a record of concussions. If someone like him can wind up with CTE (Chronic Traumatic Encephalopathy) then I dread to think what some of those players who are concussion magnets like RGII or Troy Polamalu are like. I guess this is going to put more pressure on the NFL to look at head injuries. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on August 09, 2013, 05:36:05 PM (http://i.imgur.com/Zc83NRY.jpg) (http://imgur.com/Zc83NRY)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on August 09, 2013, 07:56:32 PM God, that works on so many levels. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 14, 2013, 12:47:32 PM Probably the biggest (at least almost) injuries just happened, with Tom Brady leaving practice after gripping his leg. The same that he injured back in 2008.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on August 14, 2013, 01:30:32 PM Please God, answer my prayers that New England starts Tim Tebow.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on August 14, 2013, 01:30:51 PM Probably the biggest (at least almost) injuries just happened, with Tom Brady leaving practice after gripping his leg. The same that he injured back in 2008. Doesn't seem taht bad since the report on ESPN said he jogged off the practice field after being given the rest of the day off. Probably scared everyone on the staff so bad that he'll not be back till last game of the preseason. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 14, 2013, 01:37:04 PM Any injury to knee/leg that you've injured previously is a scare. Like I said "at least almost", but yes, it seems okay so far.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on August 14, 2013, 02:48:28 PM Titus Young - Crazy or Concussed? (http://mmqb.si.com/2013/08/13/where-is-titus-young/)
Pretty good article about batshit crazy Titus Young and the break he suffered. Seems to think that all the hits the kid did in high school leading with his head as well as undiagnosed concussions from his rookie year in the NFL might have led to him being Fruit Loops. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on August 14, 2013, 03:00:23 PM Read that earlier today. It was actually kinda eery reading other's accounts of how he has changed. Wondering if there is any truth to the bit about finding a spot on his brain. Of course, there is also a good point in that schizophrenia generally appears at about his age which could explain things along with the head thing.
And seriously, watching that video link of him in high school... holy fuck I didn't know kids were allowed to flat out spear in high school ball. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on August 14, 2013, 03:36:19 PM Apparently JJ Watt wants to play on offense for the Texans :drill:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 26, 2013, 07:29:00 AM My favorite wtf moment from this weekend.
(http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/3102585/cardinalsareterrible.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on August 26, 2013, 11:20:53 AM That's hilariously awesome.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 26, 2013, 11:32:13 AM What a clusterfuck. They should just shut Arizona down and fire the whole team.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 26, 2013, 11:45:21 AM Of course, SD fucked up a bit there too, which just makes this hilarious.
Full disclosure of course, Hillman did something similar, but the Seahawks ran it back 106. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 26, 2013, 12:14:37 PM The Bills are just fucked. But they probably aren't fucked as badly as Rex Ryan seems to be. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on August 26, 2013, 12:17:07 PM Why they didn't just fire Rex after last season was beyond me. It's not like they are ever going to get better with the current format. Plus you wasted draft picks with him as the coach.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on August 26, 2013, 12:30:29 PM Why they didn't just fire Rex after last season was beyond me. It's not like they are ever going to get better with the current format. Plus you wasted draft picks with him as the coach. Because so long as you have a dumpster fire like Sanchez signed with guaranteed money through this year, why waste a perfectly good coach's first year dealing with a lame duck QB on a team that needs to get shitloads of draft picks? End of the year when the Jets and the Bills are done one-upping each other in the who sucks worst competition, they can fire Rex, get a real head coach and have some more high draft picks to replace Sanchez - they must also think Geno Smith can flourish under a real coach. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on August 26, 2013, 12:33:38 PM (http://sinfl.files.wordpress.com/2013/08/geno-smith-gif.gif?w=450&h=281)
Even if we don't get much of the Sanchize butt-fumble moments this year, I think Geno Smith will be able to provide his own humor. edit: better image. That slow-mo pause was wigging me out. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 26, 2013, 12:35:25 PM Geno Smith is going to be worse than Sanchez.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on August 26, 2013, 12:48:12 PM Are you calling him a dirty Sanchez? I think you are.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on August 26, 2013, 12:54:30 PM Looks like the Pats just clinched the AFC East.... again. Might as well put the x by their team name in the standings right now.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 26, 2013, 01:00:53 PM If you're saying that, just give them the Y.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 26, 2013, 01:01:43 PM Yeah, they do have Tebow so might as well.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 26, 2013, 01:04:11 PM I fully welcome Rex Ryan as the 2014 defensive coordinator for the Broncos, after Del Rio get's a headcoach job somewhere else.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on August 26, 2013, 01:16:34 PM Why they didn't just fire Rex after last season was beyond me. It's not like they are ever going to get better with the current format. Plus you wasted draft picks with him as the coach. Ryan isn't making personnel decisions though, is he? I mean, I don't like him at all and don't think he's a very good coach, but I don't think Vince Lombardi could do anything with that 'talent'. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 26, 2013, 01:22:51 PM Rex Ryan is not really the problem for the Jets. He's a great fucking
I think Rex will be actually happy when he gets fired. Who the fuck would voluntarily want to coach in a city that hates it's own teams as much as NY. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on August 26, 2013, 02:11:32 PM He's a great fucking couch. The bolded part must be a Freudian slip. Also, he's a great DEFENSIVE coach. As a head coach he's shit, no matter who is making personnel decisions. Though there have been some truly clueless fucking personnel decisions too. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 26, 2013, 02:13:10 PM I have to believe that the proof is in the pudding here. He hasn't shown me a damned thing.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 26, 2013, 02:13:41 PM He's a great fucking couch. The bolded part must be a Freudian slip. Also, he's a great DEFENSIVE coach. As a head coach he's shit, no matter who is making personnel decisions. Though there have been some truly clueless fucking personnel decisions too. Oh man. What's really hilarious is that I was thinking of weaving a pun in there, and then backed out... only to put... something in there. I just got off on the wrong foot. And yes, Defensive. Like I said, I totally will be happy with him being the Broncos 2014 DC. It will definitely give us a leg up on the competition. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 27, 2013, 01:30:22 PM Looks like Tebow survived cut number one....
God must be on his side. :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on August 27, 2013, 01:35:56 PM Looks like Tebow survived cut number one.... God must be on his side. :awesome_for_real: There's value in a guy that's strong enough to carry two Gatorade containers at a time. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 27, 2013, 01:38:06 PM You have to wonder why he keeps bothering with this. He would make so much money on the looney Christian talk circuit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 27, 2013, 01:45:45 PM The one thing you can never fault Tebow on is his DESIRE to play football. Ability is an entirely different matter.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 27, 2013, 02:42:27 PM I would have thought his desire to be a god fearing bible thumping hatred spewing bigot would have been more.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 27, 2013, 02:46:13 PM That stuff seems to be calming down a bit. He even cancelled on Jeffress.
See. He can't even be a BIGOT correctly. The guy is just an abject failure. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on August 27, 2013, 03:08:46 PM Titus Young can't show up in court ever - arrest warrant issued (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9604126/arrest-warrant-issued-ex-detroit-lions-wr-titus-young).
That kid has got to be just fucked in the head. This was the court appearance he was supposed to make to answer other charges and it's the 4th time he's missed a court date. Also, I don't think Tebow is a bigot - he's just a great poster boy for bigots to use to make their hate-spewing shit more palatable. I still want Brady to take a helmet to the knee so Hobo Bill is forced to play Tebow at QB. Geno Smith can't unseat the human turnover machine MARK FUCKING SANCHEZ, hurts himself, then Sanchez gets put back in against the Giants in the 4th qurater of a meaningless exhibition and hurts his shoulder. Oh Rex, is there nothing you can't fuck up with this quarterback situation? Any minute now I expect Deadspin to post your private YouTube channel dedicated to Sanchez foot fetish videos. The Bills are a more of a dumpster fire than the Jets apparently. Kolb's bean is so fragile he can't take a feather to the head without being concussed. Of course, that would only matter if E.J. Manuel hadn't gone down with a knee injury that will probably keep him out of the season opener at least. The Bills are preparing for their 3rd string undrafted rookie QB to start Week 1, unless Matt Leinart can unseat him. YES, MATT LEINART. Go Trojans. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on August 27, 2013, 03:16:44 PM (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BScn7b4CQAEvDf8.jpg:large)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on August 27, 2013, 10:13:37 PM Also, I don't think Tebow is a bigot - he's just a great poster boy for bigots to use to make their hate-spewing shit more palatable. I still want Brady to take a helmet to the knee so Hobo Bill is forced to play Tebow at QB. I think Ryan Mallet would get the nod over Tebow in any case, wouldn't he? Anyway, it seems likely that Tebow will get cut at some point. Kind of a shame - it still seems like there is plenty of untapped talent there, just not at the QB position. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on August 28, 2013, 02:10:50 AM He didn't play against the Lions, so unless he starts against the Giants, or gets a good couple of series, he's not going to have a chance to shine.
I read yesterday that he's had a total of 71 snaps since Denver lost to NE in the playoffs two seasons ago, and in that game he took 77 snaps. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on August 28, 2013, 05:39:38 AM Also, I don't think Tebow is a bigot Once he hits the post-career talk circuit we'll find out what he's really about, and I think you'll be wrong. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on August 28, 2013, 11:12:33 AM Saw this in a Fantasy blog and it made me laugh... so I'm sharing.
Quote Matt Schaub, QB, Texans: Unless you get points for handing off, he should be undrafted in one-QB, 10-team leagues. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on August 28, 2013, 12:24:50 PM And the counter argument on Schaub:
Quote Schaub (7.7 YPA since 2010) is the 24th QB drafted. The argument is that he’s not going to get a lot of attempts for the Texans, given their defensive prowess and running game. But last year, he threw about as much as Aaron Rodgers. He did go over 4,000 yards, too. And he had a 500-yard passing day. But the caveat here is that Schaub for his career has, for reasons I do not understand, badly underachieved with a 4.3% TD rate when it should be about 5.5%. Obviously, the bias in favor of running near the goal line is a factor here. But the whole idea of using models in projections is to do your thinking when building the model and then stop thinking and do what it’s telling you. http://sports.yahoo.com/news/football-by-the-numbers--quarterbacks-and-ypa-172125563.html For the record, I don;t agree with the counter argument. You should not use a statistical framework with arbitrary divisions to overrule common sense. As long as the Texans have a healthy Foster, Schaub will have a lot fewer TDs than comparable QBs. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 28, 2013, 12:28:41 PM Using the JV F13 League as a reference, Schaub was the #19 QB in 2012 and #20 in 2011 (Right behind tebow.)
The argument against Schaub is that their scheme doesn't allow for a top 10 scoring QB. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on August 28, 2013, 03:09:17 PM Aaron Hernandez used PCP, was told by Belichek to lie low or risk getting cut (http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/9608818/former-new-england-patriots-tight-end-aaron-hernandez-took-angel-dust-was-paranoid-report-says)
Supposedly an article in an upcoming issue of Rolling Stone alleges that Aaron Hernandez was using PCP for the last year. I find that really hard to believe considering how much drug testing these guys get up to. If he was on angel dust, I'd think he'd have failed at least one NFL drug test. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on August 28, 2013, 03:26:37 PM The actual article is linked in the article you linked, fyi.
http://www.rollingstone.com/feature/the-gangster-in-the-huddle Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on August 28, 2013, 05:18:30 PM Rolling Stone never fails to impress with the quality of it's journalism. Perhaps this piece is a little sensational in parts, but it feels pretty comprehensive. Thanks!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 03, 2013, 01:50:18 PM (http://i.minus.com/iuUpbS8trI2rN.gif)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 03, 2013, 01:57:41 PM Is there something more to this or is it just truly a gif of Bayless being his usual dumb self?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 03, 2013, 02:15:32 PM That gif makes me hate him more.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 03, 2013, 02:15:56 PM Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 03, 2013, 02:49:11 PM Is there something more to this or is it just truly a gif of Bayless being his usual dumb self? The latter Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 03, 2013, 03:02:17 PM He has such a Doucheface.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 05, 2013, 12:14:39 PM http://Apparently Broncos need a team sponsored driving school. (http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_24022900/julius-thomas-denver-broncos-player-arrested-failing-appear)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: taolurker on September 05, 2013, 12:53:18 PM Billboard for Broncos (http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/billboard-broncos-stadium-encourages-league-let-players-marijuana-213443709--nfl.html)
(http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f27/taolurker/billboard.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 05, 2013, 12:56:07 PM The NFL policy won't change until at least it's nationally legal.
By the way, the broncos players haven't had a problem with drinking this offseason, that's the staff. :P Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 05, 2013, 01:25:24 PM The NFL policy won't change until at least it's nationally legal. I doubt it will change then either. I'd bet that the players will just have a clause in their contract that prohibits its use. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 05, 2013, 04:25:26 PM How I'm celebrating the return of football tonight.
(http://i.imgur.com/hOCRCG6l.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on September 05, 2013, 04:31:23 PM It's still too hot for football.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 05, 2013, 06:13:27 PM HERE WE GO
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: JWIV on September 05, 2013, 08:24:50 PM Oh good. The Ravens just took out half of their own starters because it's clownshoe time, and Peyton is just going to throw bombs all night to some guy who used to play basketball and is now TouchdownJesus.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 05, 2013, 10:02:31 PM That pretty much sums up the game. Manning is on my fantasy team hooray!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 05, 2013, 10:19:13 PM By my calculations, Manning is on pace to throw 112 TDs this season. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 06, 2013, 06:26:12 AM Guess which QB has the larger salary. Go ahead... guess.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 06, 2013, 06:31:01 AM Of course I had to draw Manning week 1. Of course.
Fuck me. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on September 06, 2013, 07:12:20 AM Flacco's contract was ridiculous and he will prove it this year. The Ravens won the Super Bowl because they had a well-balanced team with talent in many key positions. That doesn't exist this year and paying your QB a billion dollars doesn't fix that.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on September 06, 2013, 07:12:34 AM Guess which QB has the larger salary. Go ahead... guess. Well, everytime in the past when they tried to rely on Mr. Elite, the guy fell flat. It's still the RBs and especially Rice that carries this offense. Cameron didn't want to acknowledge that and that's why they ultimately fired him. Seriously, look at just how many times Flacco dumped it off to Rice and he worked his magic. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 06, 2013, 07:21:16 AM Flacco's contract was ridiculous and he will prove it this year. The Ravens won the Super Bowl because they had a well-balanced team with talent in many key positions. That doesn't exist this year and paying your QB a billion dollars doesn't fix that. This. Flacco doesn't deserve the salary he commands. He's not an elite QB... not even close. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on September 06, 2013, 07:33:22 AM Let's not forget:
(https://1-ps.googleusercontent.com/sx/www.ridethepine.com/lh6.googleusercontent.com/-jSUIpGItMqs/UilYrGPPgFI/AAAAAAAABhU/Dex6WASlpHA/w1200-h676-no/broncosfumble.gif.pagespeed.ce.mfWYb6MEef.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 06, 2013, 07:38:30 AM Yep, and anyone paying any attention knew that Flacco was a decent QB with a good team. Now he's a decent but inconsistent QB with no receivers and a weaker defense. How many times did he throw an accurate pass and it get dropped? Quite a few times. I guess it sucks knowing your leading receiver got traded to the team you beat in the Super Bowl because you wanted to be considered an elite QB. Douchebag. I look forward to the Ravens struggling to make the playoffs. The AFC North is Cincy's to lose unless Pittsburgh finds the fountain of youth or Cleveland is possessed by the spirit of a team that is not in Cleveland. The Ravens got substantially weaker on defense, their best receiver is in San Fran and their best TE is on IR. Denver was able to stuff Ray Rice's running and get the lead and that was all she wrote. Not challenging that Welker dropped pass was a big turnaround in the game, but then getting your punt blocked inside your own 20 didn't help either.
Denver is the clear favorite in the AFC. New England is the only team I see that's even close to challenging them, and once Amendola gets hurt, they got NOTHING for Brady to throw to. Not that he's ever needed a wideout to be good for them to succeed but still. The only other team close to these two is Houston and I'm not sure they have enough quality in depth if a few of their starters get hurt. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 06, 2013, 07:54:47 AM My takeaways from last night.
If we're going to post that GIF, let's post this one: (http://usatthebiglead.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/jacoby-jones-hit-by-brynden-trawick.gif) Both plays came close to seriously injuring star players from both teams. Trevathan, before that, played lights out ball. There was a lot of talk leading up to this game that Baltimore's Defense actually got BETTER in the offseason while question marks abounded about the power of the offense. In some parts their D DID get better, as their secondary play was phenomenal, keeping everything locked down. Unfortunately, playing man coverage with Welker, and a giant of a human being in Julius Thomas spelled disaster. Neither team ran the ball well, but I was much happier with Moreno than I had been in a long time. Dude is the starter until he fucks up or Montee Ball comes into his own. Hillman is the CLEAR #3 back. We don't miss Dumerville at all, especially the pay. Last night? $8M for Doom equalled one sack, while the $1.5M for Shaun Phillips produced 2.5 sacks. Admiteddly there will be that much more opportunities for sacks when the team is playing from behind, but it still makes me feel better. I LOVE DRC. LOVE. Completely shut down his side of the field. Really, I love what I saw from the Broncos D completely. The adjustments they made in the second half really came to fruition and they played fast and hard. Also, GOD DAMMIT DECKER. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on September 06, 2013, 08:18:28 AM I LOVE DRC. LOVE. Completely shut down his side of the field. Really, I love what I saw from the Broncos D completely. The adjustments they made in the second half really came to fruition and they played fast and hard. Also, GOD DAMMIT DECKER. Was just talking with my bud about the adjustments in the second half. They played really great and DRC played amazing. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 06, 2013, 08:22:26 AM Denver's defense is just solid even without Von Miller. Hell, their front 4 was shutting down most of the running game in the first half. All it took was the Broncos getting a lead and their secondary could just do their thing. Torrey Smith is really the only danger on that receiver corps and he is WILDLY inconsistent.
Speaking of stupid plays, WTF was Welker thinking on that fumbled punt return? Why would you even think about catching a punt at the five fucking yard line? Let it bounce. Such a rookie mistake. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on September 06, 2013, 07:15:01 PM Aw yeah, NFL Is baaaack! God, Denver looks invincible, but we all know what happened to them last year, so I'm not crowning them Superbowl champs just yet.
Good to see Manning razor sharp, I really hope the best for him, he's not got a lot of game years left. I hope the Titans beat the Steelers, but the Titans defense in the preseason gives me a sad. So probably not. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: jgsugden on September 07, 2013, 09:54:12 PM I am a little surprised that so many people are lauding Denver so much. They played well, but how many of those points were a result of ridiculous breakdowns by the Ravens defense / special teams? Manning and the Broncos (outside a few guys that were off their game) are a serious top 5 team this year, but come on... this game shouldn't change anyone's perceptions of the Broncos.
As for Joe Fuck-hole, that contract was right up there with Barry Zito, A-Rod and JaMarcus Russell in terms of worst contracts. They should have let him go to another team and traded for Alex Smith. That would have allowed them to resign their defensive talent (which they apparently could still use), build the run game back up and do what they did in the Dilfer years - run and defense combined with safe QB play. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 07, 2013, 11:02:59 PM You still have to be a good team to capitalize on the other teams bad performance and you can say "Team A played well" while still saying "Team B played poorly".
But, the broncos were a second half team last year too. They defer because they'd rather make the adjustments at half time and come out slinging. The perceptions leading directly into the game was the big worry about how good the pass rush (and the defense as a whole) would be without Dumerville, without Von Miller, and without Champ Bailey. Additionally, the Run D was not that great last year. So, speaking as a fan of the team, last night changed my perceptions greatly, especially on the Run D aspect of it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 08, 2013, 09:31:46 AM I am a little surprised that so many people are lauding Denver so much. Who in the AFC can give Denver a run? New England with no WR? Old-Man-Pittsburgh? We like Denver because the AFC has fuck all as competition. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on September 08, 2013, 10:02:24 AM Ah, football season again! That precious time of the year your team is undefeated, well most of them. I think the AFC will be more contested than you think. Houston, New England and Cincy, yes Cincy have legitimate shots.
Edit: Oh good start Titans, good start I say! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 08, 2013, 11:01:32 AM Charles Tillman, the Bears' 2nd best WR.... :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 08, 2013, 11:41:18 AM Charles Tillman, the Bears' 2nd best WR.... :why_so_serious: At this point, he's their 1st best WR. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 08, 2013, 01:30:39 PM Old-Man-Pittsburgh? I doubt Pittsburgh will even be .500 team with Pouncey out for the year. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 08, 2013, 02:29:45 PM Terelle Pryor, week 1 NFL rushing leader
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 08, 2013, 02:42:08 PM Man the Lions just did not want to win that game. Ponder is terrible.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 08, 2013, 04:08:18 PM Steelers looked like ass.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 08, 2013, 04:19:21 PM (http://i.imgur.com/MUUfsJp.gif)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 08, 2013, 04:24:29 PM The worst quarterback in the league throws a bad pick 6. News at 11.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 08, 2013, 04:35:29 PM usually they manage to get picked off the other side of the line of scrimmage though. :grin:
Conclusions so far; Alex Smith and Carson Palmer are doing good work and should make things more interesting this year. Chicago's defense is still scary as fuck, and as a bous our O-Line rookies seem to actually know how to stop the other team from sacking our QB. Bengals are going to eat their division up. Steelers are going to suck, even more so with the loss of Pouncey (sad times, he's a great player), Jags are going to suck, Jets are going to suck and Geno Smith is not going to save them, Browns will also continue to suck, and also seem content to waste Trent Richardson in pass protection. Jordan Cameron is going to be good for them. Fins don't look terrible, but they still have stuff to figure out on O. Pats are going to win their division because Brady is magic. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on September 08, 2013, 04:41:36 PM Your team lose the first game of the season? Someone made team posters in the vein of Game of Thrones, so go there and rekindle the football fire in thy breast!
http://whatshotdjroomba.minus.com/uploads (http://whatshotdjroomba.minus.com/uploads) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 08, 2013, 05:29:20 PM The worst quarterback in the league throws a bad pick 6. News at 11. That was beyond a bad pick. That was possibly the worst pick you will see all season. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 08, 2013, 05:40:54 PM The worst quarterback in the league throws a bad pick 6. News at 11. That was beyond a bad pick. That was possibly the worst pick you will see all season. I would expect nothing less from Gabbert! :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on September 08, 2013, 05:52:05 PM Eli better be careful, his face may get stuck in that position :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Merusk on September 08, 2013, 06:55:48 PM Houston, New England and Cincy, yes Cincy have legitimate shots. Well, unless of course they continue to do stupid shit like make unnecessary roughness penalties at key junctures, like the 2 today. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 08, 2013, 10:56:21 PM Charles Tillman, the Bears' 2nd best WR.... :why_so_serious: At this point, he's their 1st best WR. Are you just pre-programmed to hate Brandon Marshall? Because he's really, really good. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 09, 2013, 06:56:10 AM HOW BOUT DEM TURNOVERS! :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 09, 2013, 07:38:08 AM Giants were one of the teams I thought might be an automatic loss for our 6-week stretch of being Von Millerless... suddenly seems a little more winnable now.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 09, 2013, 07:39:44 AM That was a remarkably close game for a team that coughed up the ball 6 times, though.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on September 09, 2013, 07:41:37 AM Yeah so many blown opportunities by the Cowboys but at least they didn't choke at the end.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 09, 2013, 07:53:29 AM After my fantasy draft I was kicking myself for taking DeMarco Murray instead of David Wilson when I already had Dez Bryant, since I hate having RB/WR combos from the same team. After Wilson's performance last night though...
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 09, 2013, 08:57:36 AM Yeah so many blown opportunities by the Cowboys but at least they didn't choke at the end. Don't worry. They still have all the right pieces in place to make this a shitty season. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on September 09, 2013, 09:03:23 AM As a Giants fan I'm not sure if I should be horrified that they turned the ball over 6 times, or impressed that they still almost managed to win.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 09, 2013, 09:05:48 AM I think the answer to that question is "Yes".
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 09, 2013, 09:08:54 AM I'm impressed the Cowboys won a first game. That's two years in a row now against the G-Men.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 09, 2013, 10:01:04 AM God, that was a horrible, horrible fucking game last night and everyone involved should be deeply fucking ashamed for having played in it. How fucking bad of a team are the Cowboys when they can almost lose to a team so thoroughly inept that it turned the ball over 6 fucking times? I really hope the Redskins are better than last year because if they aren't, the NFC East will be a raging dumpster fire this year. Two fumbles by the starting running back that you chose over the perennially injured Ahmad Bradshaw, picks galore both Eli's fault and not Eli's fault, a defense that manages to stop the Cowboys multiple times until they just run out of gas. Utter fucking clownshoes. The Cowboys' defense looks good and their offense looks... suspect to say the least. That ought to have been a curbstomping with as many short fields as the Cowboys got. At least Romo didn't look too bad when he wasn't getting sandwiched between two sides of beef because his O line cannot block for shit.
The Packers made that game a lot closer than I expected, which is a good sign, but I had already written it off as a loss the minute I saw the schedule. They had better get Morgan Burnett back stat, because holy shit, their safeties couldn't cover ME running down the middle of the field, much less the Beast with Two Backs that is Boldin and Davis. I mean, it wasn't even fucking funny how many times those guys got open just running down the seam with a giant placard saying "COVER ME!" in their hands. The Pack's defensive line performed well, and I thought they managed contain on Kaepernick enough that Harbaugh didn't bother with much read-option shit and the Niners' running game was stifled. The Packers didn't get much running game at all, but I didn't expect one against San Fran - that defense is just too good. Almost as bad as the coverage, though, was the really FUCKSTUPID penalties the Packers gave up. I'm not even that fucked off about the refs missing that offsetting penalties thing - if Matthews had kept his fucking head and not launched himself against the guy clearly out of bounds or if McCarthy would have just declined the penalty on 3rd down and given the Niners 4th and 2, I don't think San Fran scores that TD. However, you give them 3 goddamn attempts at the same fucking 3rd down, THEY WILL EAT YOUR SOULS. Clearly, the Niners are the best team in the NFC, IMO. Atlanta and New Orleans turned out to be a better game than I thought, and the Saints D is better than I thought. I still think Atlanta's a better team, though. Fuck you, Bengals, for not closing the deal on the Bears. That division is still yours to lose though, because Pittsburgh looks like dogshit, Cleveland is still called The Browns, and the Ravens have possibly the dumbest GM other than the Jags' GM. I'm betting Joe Flacco was watching that San Fran/Green Bay game and eyeing his stack of $100 bills and wondering if he'd taken about 1/4 fewer of them, would he have someone on his team who can catch the ball? And while I'm on that subject, what fucking mutton head trades their best wide receiver to the team they barely beat in the Super Bowl for a 6th rounder? Then gives their overrated QB one of the richest contracts in history? I agree with the sentiment that the Ravens should have let his ass go and picked up Alex Smith instead. Also, the Chiefs suddenly look a good team now that they have a real QB - yes, I said it, Alex Smith is a real QB. He ain't elite and granted, his first game was against the Jags but shit. Alex Smith coached by Andy Reid with the offensive talent that team has ought to be a surefire wild card in the garbage scow of the AFC. The Jags have a QB competition and Gabbert WINS that competition even against Chad Henne? How many ways can the universe tell Chad Henne that his QB career is done? Gabbert beat you out. That's the kind of thing that should kill a man's soul. And oh you Tampa Bay Bucs. You let Geno Smith and the J-E-T-S JETS beat you because of the most ill-disciplined idiotic penalty I think I've seen in a while. Way to lay down and die. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 09, 2013, 10:04:04 AM Kaep as a pocket passer loooked GREAT.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 09, 2013, 10:43:01 AM Almost as bad as the coverage, though, was the really FUCKSTUPID penalties the Packers gave up. I'm not even that fucked off about the refs missing that offsetting penalties thing - if Matthews had kept his fucking head and not launched himself against the guy clearly out of bounds or if McCarthy would have just declined the penalty on 3rd down and given the Niners 4th and 2, I don't think San Fran scores that TD. However, you give them 3 goddamn attempts at the same fucking 3rd down, THEY WILL EAT YOUR SOULS. Clearly, the Niners are the best team in the NFC, IMO. And you shouldn't be upset about the offsetting penalties thing (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/09/09/nfl-now-says-packers-not-49ers-benefitted-from-officials-mistake/) as there never should have been a flag on Staley to create an offset. I think it is right that Staley should not have been flagged and Matthews should have had a 2nd personal foul on him and possible ejection for hitting a player's helmet after the play was over. Being upset with McCarthy is right, that was just a dumb call instead of putting the 49ers into a 4th down where they likely would have gone for 3. 49ers still win by 2 if they kick the FG though, and GB still had plenty of chances to win as that all happened mid/early 2nd qtr. Granted momentum changes are an X factor so it could have changed a lot more in that game if McCarthy doesn't fuck up on his decision with the penalty. Except the "fuck you, Bengals" part as I would like to thank them for their dumb penalties, I'm with you on everything else, :grin: 49ers are still the main team in the NFC, Packers are still #2, and they'll see each other again in December unless the Seahawks play like they did at the end of last season and take one of their spots in the NFC championship. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 09, 2013, 11:10:02 AM I hope the NFC East is a dumpster fire. That way the Cowboys will win it with 9-6! :drill:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on September 09, 2013, 11:25:16 AM I hope the NFC East is a dumpster fire. That way the Cowboys will win it with 9-6! :drill: That would be quite the accomplishment.Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 09, 2013, 12:01:11 PM I hope the NFC East is a dumpster fire. That way the Cowboys will win it with 9-6! :drill: That would be quite the accomplishment.Indeed, winning at 9-6 is an accomplishment stating that the rest of the NFC east is so shitty that the Cowboys don't even have to play their 16th game (which is still possible) :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 09, 2013, 12:06:42 PM 9-7 then!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 09, 2013, 12:25:40 PM Or! 9-6-1
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on September 09, 2013, 12:48:06 PM Houston, New England and Cincy, yes Cincy have legitimate shots. Well, unless of course they continue to do stupid shit like make unnecessary roughness penalties at key junctures, like the 2 today. Not to mention multiple too few or too many men on the field problems. Not to mention horrible turn overs. Not to mention the defense still lacks a general and got utterly lost on at least 3 plays (so lost you could tell from the tv broadcast) so here's hoping Harrison will nominate someone and tell them to step up or do it himself. Oh and Maualuga still blows ass and still no safeties. :mob: If Pollack or Thurman had been able to stay in the league and play as well as they looked like they might as rookies... Stupid Paelos. This is probably the most talented roster the Bengals have had in a long long time, it certainly is on par with the best Palmer, Chad and Housh years. The Bears were not better players but they were the better team by miles, what a fucking disgrace. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Merusk on September 09, 2013, 01:39:38 PM I didn't watch the whole game. I saw the first 7 mins of the first quarter and the stupid-ass UN call and then went to mow the lawn. I got back inside just in time to watch the 2nd UN call and just chalked it up to a guy who's got no control of his team and players who realize it; Marvin Lewis. (No fault of his because he's so castrated by Brown that there's no way the players would respect him. )
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 09, 2013, 01:57:10 PM And oh you Tampa Bay Bucs. You let Geno Smith and the J-E-T-S JETS beat you because of the most ill-disciplined idiotic penalty I think I've seen in a while. Way to lay down and die. It's hard to get on that linebacker too hard because that was an awfully close call (unlike the Clay Matthews penalty) and earlier in the game in the same exact situation with Geno Smith seemingly running out of bounds, he instead turned it upfield at the last second and gained a bunch more yards. Credit Smith with taking advantage of the NFL treating QBs like priceless porcelain figurines and making sure Lavonte David was fucked no matter what he did. Everyone who didn't see the game is skewering the guy but of all the bone-headed, sloppy plays the Bucs had in that game I rank that hit pretty low. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 09, 2013, 03:27:54 PM I don't know, that looked like a pretty boneheaded play to me - I saw it live as they switched the feed over to that game after the Saints won. I know defense are trained to not restrain their hits but some of these guys need to learn when is the right time to do that. 4th quarter with a razor thin lead? Definitely the time.
Also, yes, Clay Matthews was a goddamn meathead on that play. He really should never have been in that position, though. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 09, 2013, 05:42:49 PM Well this Eagles offense looks terrifying.
Great. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 09, 2013, 06:12:31 PM To be fair, Washington looks REALLY REALLY REALLY bad. But yeah, this Eagles offense is high powered.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 09, 2013, 06:38:24 PM I see the NFC East will truly be a clown car of fail this year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on September 09, 2013, 06:40:49 PM :uhrr:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 09, 2013, 07:36:21 PM Philly was making a STRONG case early in the game. That high speed offense really slowed down in the second half, though.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 10, 2013, 05:23:07 AM Just wait until midseason, when coaches have had a chance to watch a little tape. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 10, 2013, 07:25:53 AM Looking at Philly's performance in the first half, take into account JUST HOW BAD the Washington offense was playing. That kind of high tempo offense is going to wear a defense out normally - even more so when the goddamn offense gets all of 3 first downs in 2 quarters. What was it that made that offense slow down? 1) Michael Vick, the human turnover machine and 2) the Washington offense staying on the field. That game should have been an absolute route, but it wasn't. Vick's inability to read blitzes as well as his inaccuracy as a passer did as much to slow that offense down as anything. They will score some points, and they will be better than they were last year, this is true. But when Vick goes south, that offense is going to get hammered. At least their defense is better than it was last year. Still, that whole division is just a sloppy mess. Games involving those teams are going to be excruciating to watch.
So did that Houston/San Diego game change the dynamic in the AFC a bit? San Diego certainly looked better than last year - for 2.25 quarters. As soon as Houston got back into the game, though, Rivers fell apart. Their defense looks improved - when it's not on the field for 90% of the quarter. Houston, however, looks extremely vulnerable on defense, especially in the secondary. Of course, they also didn't have Ed Reed at safety so that may be part of the reason. Either way, I think the AFC West may be the most competitive division in the AFC - and that should not be. But the other 3 divisions have at best 2 good teams in them, whereas San Diego may surprise some people this year. It's going to be a scrum at the bottom to see who sucks worse - Jacksonville, Oakland, Cleveland, Pittsburgh, The Jets, Buffalo and Tennessee. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on September 10, 2013, 07:31:28 AM Looking at Philly's performance in the first half, take into account JUST HOW BAD the Washington offense was playing. That kind of high tempo offense is going to wear a defense out normally - even more so when the goddamn offense gets all of 3 first downs in 2 quarters. What was it that made that offense slow down? 1) Michael Vick, the human turnover machine and 2) the Washington offense staying on the field. That game should have been an absolute route, but it wasn't. Vick's inability to read blitzes as well as his inaccuracy as a passer did as much to slow that offense down as anything. They will score some points, and they will be better than they were last year, this is true. But when Vick goes south, that offense is going to get hammered. At least their defense is better than it was last year. Still, that whole division is just a sloppy mess. Games involving those teams are going to be excruciating to watch. Vick just needs to do enough to let Shady do his thing. (http://i.imgur.com/ihX0j87.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 10, 2013, 12:21:18 PM Suh fined $100,000 (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Suh-fined-100000-by-NFL-for-low-block-on-Sullivan.html)
Couldn't happen to a nicer asshole. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 10, 2013, 12:46:22 PM He's just going to be tossed out of the league at some point if he doesn't cut this shit out.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 10, 2013, 12:51:02 PM Quote Suh was fined $100,000 by NFL vice president of operations Merton Hanks I hope he did his dance to celebrate afterwards. Also, given the relative visibility of their offences, I'd hate to be Clay Matthews right about now. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 10, 2013, 12:52:43 PM There's just no way Suh isn't on roids. He's too unstable.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 10, 2013, 04:24:25 PM Quote Suh was fined $100,000 by NFL vice president of operations Merton Hanks I hope he did his dance to celebrate afterwards. Also, given the relative visibility of their offences, I'd hate to be Clay Matthews right about now. A favored player on one of America's favorite teams? Little to worry about, maybe $25k for someone without a lot of previous trouble. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 10, 2013, 04:33:41 PM Kaepernick had it coming. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on September 10, 2013, 05:57:39 PM Quote Suh was fined $100,000 by NFL vice president of operations Merton Hanks I hope he did his dance to celebrate afterwards. Also, given the relative visibility of their offences, I'd hate to be Clay Matthews right about now. A favored player on one of America's favorite teams? Little to worry about, maybe $25k for someone without a lot of previous trouble. If that's a low visability team the player would be suspended. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on September 10, 2013, 06:02:27 PM If that's a low visability team the player would be suspended. I don't know... Matthew's hit was out of bounds and late, but it was basically a legal tackle if it were in bounds. Suh's was plain dirty and going for someone's legs can end their career. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 10, 2013, 06:09:56 PM If that's a low visability team the player would be suspended. I don't know... Matthew's hit was out of bounds and late, but it was basically a legal tackle if it were in bounds. Suh's was plain dirty and going for someone's legs can end their career. It's a whole different world to perform a legal tackle on someone in bounds and bracing for it than on someone who let up their effort and is out of bounds while supposedly protected. Otherwise, I dunno about the low viability player being suspended or not....I never see them :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on September 10, 2013, 08:17:13 PM If that's a low visability team the player would be suspended. I don't know... Matthew's hit was out of bounds and late, but it was basically a legal tackle if it were in bounds. Suh's was plain dirty and going for someone's legs can end their career. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 10, 2013, 08:26:38 PM It wasn't a clothes line tackle. It was "just" a hit out of bounds.
video to illsutrate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_cq5dPRzTg Matthews arm wraps around Kaep's arm and his hand hits him square in the chest. It would have been a completely legal hit if it were in bounds. Matthews was dirt dumb for hitting him when he did, but it wasn't a dirty play (as in a clothesline). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 10, 2013, 09:48:07 PM At this rate, we may be without Von Miller for the year.
http://denver.cbslocal.com/2013/09/10/von-miller-in-more-legal-trouble/ Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 10, 2013, 10:08:00 PM He doesn't get Kaep in the front of the neck or anything but the arm looks over the shoulder to me, not around his arm.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 10, 2013, 10:24:11 PM If it's shoulder, it's near the end of it. But even then it's still a legal hit.. well, aside from the out of bounds part of it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Velorath on September 11, 2013, 03:20:29 AM When Matthews finally gets a grip on Kaepernick, it's further down the shoulder/arm, but that first impact is right on the side of Kaepernick's head. You pause it in the right spot and you can pretty much see Matthews' bicep flush with Kaep's facemask.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 11, 2013, 03:58:47 AM Suh fined $100,000 (http://www.nationalfootballpost.com/Suh-fined-100000-by-NFL-for-low-block-on-Sullivan.html) Couldn't happen to a nicer asshole. I'm sure that will put a real dent in his $11.5M signing bonus. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on September 11, 2013, 04:27:02 AM It's a whole different world to perform a legal tackle on someone in bounds and bracing for it than on someone who let up their effort and is out of bounds while supposedly protected. Of course it is, that is why it is a 15 yard penalty. Not every personal foul deserves a fine. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2013, 06:47:36 AM I wouldn't fine Matthews anything. He went after a guy but it was a late hit and nowhere on the body that was dangerous. The penalty was enough.
If I was power ranking performances from the weekend, I'd go: 1 - SF 2 - Denver 3 - Packers 4 - Rams 5 - Chiefs 6 - Cowboys 7 - Saints 8 - Bears 9 - Texans 10 - Jets Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on September 11, 2013, 07:25:17 AM I'd put Saints a little higher.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 11, 2013, 07:40:05 AM I wouldn't fine Matthews anything. He went after a guy but it was a late hit and nowhere on the body that was dangerous. The penalty was enough. If I was power ranking performances from the weekend, I'd go: 1 - SF 2 - Denver 3 - Packers 4 - Rams 5 - Chiefs 6 - Cowboys 7 - Saints 8 - Bears 9 - Texans 10 - Jets The Chiefs played Jacksonville. Just sayin. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 11, 2013, 07:45:50 AM When Matthews finally gets a grip on Kaepernick, it's further down the shoulder/arm, but that first impact is right on the side of Kaepernick's head. You pause it in the right spot and you can pretty much see Matthews' bicep flush with Kaep's facemask. Watching it again, I think it just missses, but I'm really really not interested in Zaprudering this god damn thing. The overall point is that even if his bicep hit his facemask, it's incidental and still not a dirty fucking hit to compare against someone like Suh. It was a boneheaded and penalty worthy hit, but only because it was out of bounds. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 11, 2013, 08:22:53 AM I wouldn't fine Matthews anything. He went after a guy but it was a late hit and nowhere on the body that was dangerous. The penalty was enough. If I was power ranking performances from the weekend, I'd go: 1 - SF 2 - Denver 3 - Packers 4 - Rams 5 - Chiefs 6 - Cowboys 7 - Saints 8 - Bears 9 - Texans 10 - Jets Jets? Surely you troll sir :awesome_for_real: They just, just beat the Bucs, who are a pretty dire team in their own right. The Chiefs beat the Jags, which I'm pretty sure a team of blind lepers could do, and the Rams squeaked past the Cardinals, another middle-of-the-road team. All of those teams belong in at least the bottom 16, probably the bottom 10 of the current power rankings. This is a silly list, and you sir are a silly man. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 11, 2013, 08:33:59 AM Or maybe it's just that everyone sucks?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2013, 08:58:35 AM I'm not power ranking the teams overall, I'm doing them after a game.
And the Jets winning a game that everyone expected them to lose? That goes top 10. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 11, 2013, 09:09:30 AM The Jets won because the Bucs played a shitty, shitty game, not because the Jets are any good. I'd have stuck Philly at 10 just for that first half.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 11, 2013, 09:28:04 AM The Matthews hit was absolutely NOT dirty, nor was it a clothesline. The only thing wrong with it was that he hit the guy out of bounds - you could maybe argue that since he launched himself into the air, it was a bit cheeky but not dirty. He does that between the hashmarks, everyone's happy except Kap, who feels like he got hit by a Mack truck.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2013, 10:20:09 AM The Jets won because the Bucs played a shitty, shitty game, not because the Jets are any good. I'd have stuck Philly at 10 just for that first half. No way am I putting Philly in the top 10, they are one hit from being donzo for the season. I want to see 3 games out of that thing first. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 11, 2013, 10:27:10 AM Wanting to see 3 games out of Philly first is fair if you have the same requirement of seeing 3 wins out of NYJ first as well. :why_so_serious:
I'd say Atl, Phi, NE, DET, Cin, Minn, Was are all better than NYJ with NYJ having no reason to be in the top 15 even. SD arguably as well, they blew a 28 point lead but not many expected them to hit double digits of offensive scoring - that is a bigger feat against a tough defense compared to NYJ beating a middle of the pack TB. I'll be crazy with you though and say/agree that KC belongs in top 10 (probably 10-12) right now even if they only went against Jac, not as crazy to say top 5 though. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 11, 2013, 10:42:03 AM The Matthews hit was absolutely NOT dirty, nor was it a clothesline. The only thing wrong with it was that he hit the guy out of bounds - you could maybe argue that since he launched himself into the air, it was a bit cheeky but not dirty. He does that between the hashmarks, everyone's happy except Kap, who feels like he got hit by a Mack truck. Kaepernick was clearly out of bounds, but it's tough for these 250 pound linebackers to go absolutely full speed and pay attention to that. It was just a physical play. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 11, 2013, 10:49:54 AM The Matthews hit was absolutely NOT dirty, nor was it a clothesline. The only thing wrong with it was that he hit the guy out of bounds - you could maybe argue that since he launched himself into the air, it was a bit cheeky but not dirty. He does that between the hashmarks, everyone's happy except Kap, who feels like he got hit by a Mack truck. Kaepernick was clearly out of bounds, but it's tough for these 250 pound linebackers to go absolutely full speed and pay attention to that. It was just a physical play. Meanwhile the 230lb and faster CB next to him was able to let up and not dive at someone clearly out of bounds a day after stating how they would get as many hits on the QB as they could (with questionable legality). To me, it's about the intent, and this was not an "oh it's just happened" type of moment. Matthews overall and in general isn't a dirty player, but this was a dirty play. I do find it interesting that he hasn't even received a notice of fine yet (which usually comes before Friday-fine day). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2013, 10:51:13 AM Atlanta is ass. The fact they believe they actually have a shot at the super bowl is laughable, but they are delusional fans who are still fixated on last year. Their line on both sides is a joke, their defense is populated by rookies, and they got pass rushed to death in the 2nd half by the Saints (who aren't going to be known for that at all).
Philly looked good for a half. Then they didn't score for 28 minutes, and took a lot of stupid penalties, almost blowing the game. I think they are top 15, not top 10. NE struggled badly with the freaking Bills. You can't turn over the ball as much as they did and win against another team. I can't put them in the top 10. Detroit is bad, their coach is bad, and the fact they won is because the Vikings have absolutely no QB and will be in the bottom half of the league for the rest of the year. Cincy, I expected more from. Again, I can't top 10 a team that had 3 turnovers in their first game. That's shitty. Washington was suspect all day and RG3 isn't right yet. NOT top 10. Maybe later. The Jets probably won't be there next week, but I'm riding the wave. The Geno Smith wave! I wouldn't be shocked if they beat the Patriots if NE plays remotely similar to how they played Buffalo. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 11, 2013, 11:11:31 AM Meanwhile the 230lb and faster CB next to him was able to let up and not dive at someone clearly out of bounds a day after stating how they would get as many hits on the QB as they could (with questionable legality). To me, it's about the intent, and this was not an "oh it's just happened" type of moment. Matthews overall and in general isn't a dirty player, but this was a dirty play. I do find it interesting that he hasn't even received a notice of fine yet (which usually comes before Friday-fine day). Every single person is saying that Mathews fucked up, but the hit was clean. No one is claiming it's a "oh it just happened" thing. He hit him out of bounds, and there's a penalty for that, and he got hit with the penalty. The only thing we can say is that the Niners shouldn't have been penalized andi t should have been a first down, costing the packers greatly. But the actual hit was a clean hit, it was just out of bounds. It wansn't dirty and is in no ways comparable to Suh's actions. Not even remotely. Maybe he hasn't received a fine yet because... it wasn't fineable. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 11, 2013, 11:18:34 AM It's a whole different world to perform a legal tackle on someone in bounds and bracing for it than on someone who let up their effort and is out of bounds while supposedly protected. Of course it is, that is why it is a 15 yard penalty. Not every personal foul deserves a fine. Just the ones where they're targeting new-style running QBs for injury - the guys that have more eyeballs on NFL games than ever. It'd be the same thing if it was Patrick Willis hitting Russell Wilson in the same way. The NFL has an interest in protecting those guys, and I suspect they'll take an opportunity to make a statement *before* one of them gets hurt this time, unlike the Tom Brady knee rule change. Also you know, he did throw a "punch" afterwards. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 11, 2013, 11:23:34 AM I can almost get behind that logic, even though I disagree with it at the end of things. I could also see him getting fined for the punch.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 11, 2013, 11:27:11 AM but this was a dirty play. I do find it interesting that he hasn't even received a notice of fine yet (which usually comes before Friday-fine day). The reason he hasn't received a fine is that it wasn't a dirty play. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 11, 2013, 11:28:05 AM but this was a dirty play. I do find it interesting that he hasn't even received a notice of fine yet (which usually comes before Friday-fine day). The reason he hasn't received a fine is that it wasn't a dirty play. Given the context of pre-game statements about targeting Kaepernick, I disagree. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 11, 2013, 11:30:57 AM but this was a dirty play. I do find it interesting that he hasn't even received a notice of fine yet (which usually comes before Friday-fine day). The reason he hasn't received a fine is that it wasn't a dirty play. Given the context of pre-game statements about targeting Kaepernick, I disagree. You, sir, are not a reliable and unbiased witness. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 11, 2013, 12:11:28 PM Atlanta is ass. The fact they believe they actually have a shot at the super bowl is laughable, but they are delusional fans who are still fixated on last year. Their line on both sides is a joke, their defense is populated by rookies, and they got pass rushed to death in the 2nd half by the Saints (who aren't going to be known for that at all). Now, I will agree with you that Atlanta's offensive line is SHITTY. If the Saints are able to dial up those kinds of blitzes against a better line, I'll believe in it, but I'm not there yet. I will say that a lot of those sacks and pressures looked like good schemes that weren't picked up by Ryan or Atlanta's line so Ryan may have something to do with their success. However, I was actually impressed with Atlanta's secondary. They seemed able to cover better than I would have expected. I don't think Atlanta is Super Bowl caliber - I honestly don't think anybody can beat San Fran in the playoffs this year, including Green Bay. BUT, they aren't as bad as you make them out to be. The Jets - I'm not sure I'd put them top 20. They got lucky against a bad team with ill-disciplined players. Tampa is going nowhere this year and Josh Freeman will be somebody's backup next year. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 11, 2013, 12:17:51 PM Given the context of pre-game statements about targeting Kaepernick, I disagree. This is exactly the issue imo. Every single person is saying that Mathews fucked up, but the hit was clean. No one is claiming it's a "oh it just happened" thing. He hit him out of bounds, and there's a penalty for that, and he got hit with the penalty. The only thing we can say is that the Niners shouldn't have been penalized andi t should have been a first down, costing the packers greatly. But the actual hit was a clean hit, it was just out of bounds. It wansn't dirty and is in no ways comparable to Suh's actions. Not even remotely. Maybe he hasn't received a fine yet because... it wasn't fineable. It wasn't clean, the "oh it just happened" is simply mocking the stupidity of the argument of "if he was in bounds." Outside of the permissible margin of error there are no clean hits on players that are out of bounds, those are the ones which aren't (or shouldn't be) flagged. Matthews had more than enough time to stop knowing that Kaep was out of bounds, as proven by Tramon Williams stopping before Matthews even jumped towards Kaep, this hit had malicious intent. Also, late hits are in fact fineable. Though I'm still amazed that even the punch wasn't fined. And no, Matthews is definitely not comparable to Suh, but I'd bet Suh would have been fined another $100k if he did the same thing. Atlanta is ass. The fact they believe they actually have a shot at the super bowl is laughable, but they are delusional fans who are still fixated on last year. Their line on both sides is a joke, their defense is populated by rookies, and they got pass rushed to death in the 2nd half by the Saints (who aren't going to be known for that at all). Philly looked good for a half. Then they didn't score for 28 minutes, and took a lot of stupid penalties, almost blowing the game. I think they are top 15, not top 10. NE struggled badly with the freaking Bills. You can't turn over the ball as much as they did and win against another team. I can't put them in the top 10. Detroit is bad, their coach is bad, and the fact they won is because the Vikings have absolutely no QB and will be in the bottom half of the league for the rest of the year. Cincy, I expected more from. Again, I can't top 10 a team that had 3 turnovers in their first game. That's shitty. Washington was suspect all day and RG3 isn't right yet. NOT top 10. Maybe later. The Jets probably won't be there next week, but I'm riding the wave. The Geno Smith wave! I wouldn't be shocked if they beat the Patriots if NE plays remotely similar to how they played Buffalo. Yet all of those teams are better than NYJ which you put in the top 10 :uhrr: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 11, 2013, 12:19:50 PM Oh, yeah, re: Paelos's list:
Jets? JETS? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 11, 2013, 12:23:39 PM And no, Matthews is definitely not comparable to Suh, but I'd bet Suh would have been fined another $100k if he did the same thing. We're going round and round with the "dirty" thing, and we're apparently using it in two different positions, so I'm dropping that end of it. I'll just say I think the matter was finished when he got penalized for it. The reason Suh gets in trouble, is that, well, it's not Suh's first trip to the rodeo. If Matthews starts to build up a history of being as dirty as Suh, he'll start raking up those fines. Oh, yeah, re: Paelos's list: Jets? JETS? JETS. J-E-T-S... but I think we got the chant backwards. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on September 11, 2013, 12:25:52 PM He doesn't go human missile until the guy is out of bounds and he wouldn't have made any kind of hit without going human missile.
Its a dirty play where he decided to hit a guy he knew was going to be out of bounds. Any time someone even attempts to put a big hit on someone they know is out of bounds that's a dirty play. All you need to know is that if anyone on the Ravens (or probably the Steelers or Raiders even) had made that kind of hit it would be a fine. But because its the Packers and doubly because its Clay Matthews we're having debates about intent and if launching yourself at a player out of bounds is really anything but a honest football play because the game is so damn fast. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 11, 2013, 12:52:06 PM Well, yeah. Fuck the Ravens. :oh_i_see:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 11, 2013, 01:13:17 PM Well, yeah. Fuck the Ravens. :oh_i_see: Too late, they already fucked themselves :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 11, 2013, 01:19:23 PM The Jets won because the Bucs played a shitty, shitty game, not because the Jets are any good. I'd have stuck Philly at 10 just for that first half. No way am I putting Philly in the top 10, they are one hit from being donzo for the season. I want to see 3 games out of that thing first. Wait, I thought you said it wasn't an overall power ranking? That one half by Philly was better than the entire game by either the Jets or the Bucs. 'But someone might get injured' is a pretty poor reason to knock a team preemptively. You knock the team after Vick turns back into Mr. Glass. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2013, 01:58:09 PM I'm also knocking them for taking their foot off the gas and letting the Skins come back. My power rankings have spoken! :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 11, 2013, 02:07:11 PM At least they had gas! :oh_i_see:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 11, 2013, 02:17:07 PM Meanwhile, on the Superbowl XVIII Wikipedia page:
Quote It will also be the first Super Bowl in NFL history to have two host teams (the New York Jets and New York Giants) as both play in the same stadium, thus it will be possible to have these two host teams play against each other should they get this far in the post-season. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2013, 02:24:33 PM Jets are gonna shock the world without the buttfumble at the helm.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on September 11, 2013, 02:39:33 PM Jets are gonna shock the world without the buttfumble at the helm. (http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/misc/tumblr_mdyqc6dJa61rshl92o1_400.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on September 11, 2013, 02:42:01 PM Jets are gonna shock the world without the buttfumble at the helm. You normally have very solid reasoning so I'll forgive you for putting the Jets 10th. THIS TIME. :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 11, 2013, 02:44:44 PM I'm also knocking them for taking their foot off the gas and letting the Skins come back. My power rankings have spoken! :grin: That wasn't them taking their foot off the gas. That was Michael Vick's chronic inaccuracy and all around shittiness come to the fore. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 11, 2013, 06:31:31 PM Warrant for Von Miller in California as well.[.url]
(http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2013/09/11/cbs-11-i-team-uncovers-von-miller-has-history-of-failing-to-appear/) Quote Investigative Reporter Mireya Villarreal uncovered Miller was cited March 22, 2012 in Orange County, California, for speeding. Susan Schroeder, Orange County District Attorney Spokesperson, confirms Miller never showed up for that ticket and a warrant was issued for his arrest. That warrant is currently active out of Orange County, California. (http://i.imgur.com/e9DgR.gif) Welp, now reports that payment was made. I'm assuming it was made after the news broke as damage control. Dude needs to take a year off, one way or the other. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: taolurker on September 11, 2013, 10:57:01 PM Jets are gonna shock the world without the buttfumble at the helm. (http://assets0.ordienetworks.com/misc/tumblr_mdyqc6dJa61rshl92o1_400.gif) Jets' Mark Sanchez has torn labrum, will try to rehab (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000242994/article/jets-mark-sanchez-has-torn-labrum-will-try-to-rehab) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 11, 2013, 11:04:38 PM Pretty sure they mean torn Labia in his case, but whatever. To be honest, this might be the best news the Jets could receive. I don't like anything about Geno Smith, but you expect at least he'd be able to run, you know, around his own guys. He can throw picks at least as well already.
All joking aside, Smith has some theoretical upside. With Sanchez, that was the best you were ever going to get, because he has been broken. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 12, 2013, 10:42:58 AM Pretty sure they mean torn Labia in his case You beat me to the joke, damn you. Yeah, Sanchez isn't even sure he's going to do the surgery because it would end his season and presumably any chance he ever has of getting a starting QB job somewhere else next year. Whereas if he plays this year, he might be able to convince someone he's worth... oh who am I kidding, his last chance to start in the NFL ended when the Giants sacked his sorry ass in a meaningless preseason game. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on September 12, 2013, 10:46:46 AM This makes no sense. The only way he even makes a roster next year is if he's completely healthy. Would off season surgery still insure this, even if he aggravates it further?
The Jets do not want him to play. Even if Smith gets ritually beheaded in the middle of a game, he will not play. There won't be a lot of good quarterback openings next year in the NFL and the draft class is pretty good. He's the worst NFL quarterback statistically since he started playing. He's a #2 or 3 if he even gets picked up. Better to give the thought that he's not completely used up than going out there and proving it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 12, 2013, 10:48:01 AM He's the worst NFL quarterback statistically since he started playing. Gabbert and Tebow are probably worse statistically but if you are being mentioned in those circles, I'm not sure it matters who sucks the most. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on September 12, 2013, 10:51:56 AM The stats I'm referring to had a specific amount of attempts attached to it. I think LaDainian Tomlinson has more pass attempts over his career than Tebow.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 12, 2013, 10:56:18 AM The offseason is long enough to rehab a labrum surgery - it happens all the time in baseball, it's a reasonably common injury for pitchers - but he should still just get the surgery done now. I think he probably does see the field if Smith gets hurt, but this is an injury that will affect his throwing even if he 'rehabs' it without surgery. Dumb.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 12, 2013, 11:08:47 AM The stats I'm referring to had a specific amount of attempts attached to it. I think LaDainian Tomlinson has more pass attempts over his career than Tebow. Not even remotely close. Not sure if there was sarcasm with that or not. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on September 12, 2013, 11:12:15 AM Would this have helped?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 12, 2013, 11:15:25 AM Would this have helped? Hmm... could you make it flash? As a Broncos fan, my "tebow sarcasm" sensor is not really... fine tuned. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on September 12, 2013, 04:56:05 PM It all makes sense now, the Jets are green for sarcasm.
Now we just need to move them to Brooklyn. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 12, 2013, 06:19:32 PM WTF does Mark Sanchez have on his head?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 12, 2013, 07:51:03 PM His lineman's ass, usually
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 12, 2013, 08:06:28 PM Pretty sure Brady just sprayed Stickum on his throwing hand.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on September 12, 2013, 08:27:46 PM Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on September 12, 2013, 08:40:06 PM Jesus, this game.
The fucking announcers are apologizing to Patriots fans about how bad they're playing and then when the Jets fuck up, they go, "Yep, that's how they beat everybody, they take better care of the ball" Sportscasters, please, stop blowing this goddamn team. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 12, 2013, 08:43:44 PM I heard "very un-Patriotlike" several times. Jesus Christ you fucks, Tom Brady is in fact fallible! I know that can be hard to believe!
Jets... Sigh... Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on September 12, 2013, 08:56:47 PM Jet fans are used to disappointment.
This too, shall pass... and probably be intercepted. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 12, 2013, 08:58:16 PM Other than the obvious bone-headed interceptions he threw, Geno Smith didn't look too bad. His team is so bad though...
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 12, 2013, 09:31:57 PM Well, that and the other two interceptions and four sacks he took. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 13, 2013, 06:27:32 AM Jets just didn't have what it took to win that game. The Patriots are not a good team this year, and nobody is willing to say it yet on the national level. Still, when you're edging out teams that turned the ball over 4 times, you have issues. The Cowboys are similar in that regard. Still the Jets were literally a replay overturn away from winning that game.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 13, 2013, 06:33:38 AM The pats don't look great, no. In the balance though, they've lost their #1 WR, TE, and RB to injuries; so there's potential for them to pick up later in the season.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 13, 2013, 07:10:26 AM Jets just didn't have what it took to win that game. The Patriots are not a good team this year, and nobody is willing to say it yet on the national level. Still, when you're edging out teams that turned the ball over 4 times, you have issues. The Cowboys are similar in that regard. Still the Jets were literally a replay overturn away from winning that game. I think you have to factor in the fact that this game was in a deluge, which does not favor offense or Tom Brady. Th Pats do look old and beat up though, and I don't expect to see them go far in the post season, however. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 13, 2013, 07:55:24 AM The pats don't look great, no. In the balance though, they've lost their #1 WR, TE, and RB to injuries; so there's potential for them to pick up later in the season. The problem is that the #1 WR is not a true #1 WR. And he's injury prone.... The Patriots are paper thin in their receiving corps and have not yet found anyone to step up, apparently. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 13, 2013, 07:58:03 AM Frankly, that was pure Patriot arrogance. They had Wes Welker and let him walk because he wasn't doing it the Patriot way.
PS - The Patriot Way for the better half of a decade is rolling over an easy division and fucking up in the playoffs. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 13, 2013, 08:07:01 AM Patriots receiving corps last year, all players over 100 yards.
Welker 118 for 1354 and 6 TDs - Not with the team Lloyd 74 for 911 and 4 TDs - Not with the team Gronk 55 for 790 and 11 TDs - Injured, back week 4ish Hernandez 51 for 483 and 5 TDs - well... we know Woodhead 40 for 446 and 3 TDs - Not with the team Edelman 21 for 235 and 3 TDs - With the team. Branch 16 for 145 and 0 TDs - Not with the team. Vereen 8 for 149 and 1 TD - Injured Hoomanawanui 5 for 109 and 0 TDs - With the team. It's not even just Welker being gone, Their corps are GUTTED. MORE LIKE CORPSE, AM I RITE? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 13, 2013, 08:15:06 AM NYJ top 10 still Paelos? :why_so_serious:
After losing Gronk for some weeks, Hernandez for 20yrs to life (potentially :why_so_serious:) Last years #1, 2, and 3 WR, and all sorts of issues at RB and their new main WR out they're still going to be top 15 imo simply because of Brady and a better defense. Likely the #4 seed due to winning the division. Also, wtf with fining Mangold? He lept at Talib, aiming for his midsection, while Talib was in bounds but due to Talib jumping Mangold hit his knees. That's not intentional or malicious - that's Talib dancing like a twat and getting hit as a result while people try to call Mangold dirty for aiming mid on an in-bounds player :uhrr: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j2zvKCPk7cU - watch from the :10 mark Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 13, 2013, 08:15:51 AM It's not even just Welker being gone, Their corps are GUTTED. MORE LIKE CORPSE, AM I RITE? This feels weird....I. I.... I agree fully with sickrubik. There, I said it. Fuck! :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 13, 2013, 08:19:51 AM Yeah, that was just unlucky timing on Manigold's fault. I guess you sorta have to throw the flag when you see that at full speed, but no way should he be fined for that or called a dirty player.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 13, 2013, 08:52:05 AM NYJ top 10 still Paelos? :why_so_serious: Probably not :awesome_for_real: But if they had that TD and won 14-13 would we all feel silly? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 13, 2013, 09:07:48 AM The NFL should be embarrassed to have called that a football game last night. They are bad people and should be punished for inflicting that shit show on a national audience.
I actually felt a little bad for Tom Brady. It's not like he played bad. He consistently put the ball on the numbers or on people's hands and they simply couldn't fucking catch. You can't blame the rain either, because it wasn't raining like that first half and guys like Dobson simply could not fucking catch the ball. You know somewhere in that tiny little heart of his, he was longing wistfully for the return of Wes Welker. Yes, they also lost Gronk but look at all the guys that were on that team last year that aren't now. Llloyd? He may not be great, but he can fucking catch the ball better than this corps of rejects. Welker, Jr. (Edelman) did as much as he could but seriously when he's the only fucking one who doesn't have bricks where his hands should be, what do you do? The Pats GM should be fucking embarrassed for having gotten rid of so much talent and not replacing it with anything but rookies. Amendola is hurt again, which should have surprised NOBODY. If he starts 12 games, I'll be shocked. Suddenly, the AFC East would look wide open... that is if the Jets weren't in the division. The Bills may actually be a passable team this year, Miami will get better with the money they spent. Unless this Pats team improves, I expect a 1st round exit from the playoffs. As for the Jets, holy fuck, what an inept bunch of clowns. Geno Smith didn't do BAD, per se, but he looked like a fucking rookie who is still trying to process all the shit the coaches have thrown at him. That one run he did in the 4th quarter, he should have done more of that. His throws weren't that bad until the 4th quarter when the rookie really came out. That team though? It's dogshit, coached by idiots. Yes, let's not have a punt returner back there on 3 separate punts, because it's not like our rookie QB couldn't be helped by better field position on a night when no one is really moving the ball that well. It's like Rex is TRYING to get himself fired. Chris Ivory was a good pickup for them, but this team is going to win games in spite of themselves, not because of any particular aptitude. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 13, 2013, 10:12:40 AM NYJ top 10 still Paelos? :why_so_serious: Probably not :awesome_for_real: But if they had that TD and won 14-13 would we all feel silly? Depends. If the refs were so bad to give them that TD then Thompkins would have had a TD gone his way as well and we're back at 20-14 (since after the drop was the missed FG iirc) and not feeling shitty. If the refs were inconsistent in their awfulness and not giving Thompkins that TD, then it's bad refs. Still not admitting that NYJ is top 10 though. I do think Geno has a really good upside though, and he's already better than Sanchez was when people were high on him. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 13, 2013, 01:53:32 PM Not to open old wounds, or stupid arguments, but Matthews fined $15k (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9669623/clay-matthews-green-bay-packers-fined-15k)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 13, 2013, 02:06:19 PM I expected a more punitive fine than that, interesting.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 14, 2013, 02:05:29 AM I guess it was okay to give him what amounts to a very small fine, but I still don't think it was dirty. Maybe the fine is more for the altercation afterwards, that would actually make sense to me. You San Fran fans are a bit biased, obviously, which is understandable...but I don't think the hit itself warranted any more than the flag.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 14, 2013, 06:05:12 AM The fine was stupid. If it wasn't the primetime game nothing happens.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Velorath on September 14, 2013, 02:58:51 PM Jets are gonna shock the world without the buttfumble at the helm. You normally have very solid reasoning so I'll forgive you for putting the Jets 10th. THIS TIME. :awesome_for_real: Solid reasoning that doesn't always end up working out. (http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=22882.msg1146715#msg1146715) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 14, 2013, 03:20:05 PM Hey now, he got one pick right! :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 15, 2013, 07:03:31 AM For the early games I like ravens, bears, cowboys, dolphins, eagles, rams, packers, panthers, and Texans
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 15, 2013, 11:28:47 AM lolRavens
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 15, 2013, 11:31:15 AM Rodgers has over 300 yards in the first half :ye_gods:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on September 15, 2013, 12:38:24 PM You know it's bad when FOX switches the game from Green Bay to Kansas City.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 15, 2013, 12:56:18 PM A lot of these favored teams are really playing poorly.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Flood on September 15, 2013, 12:58:01 PM The Manning Bowl is the 1pm game on the west coast, but because it's southern CA (well central valley) they are broadcasting the Jags vs. Oakland. So the two worst teams in the AFC...but because one of them is the Raiders that's what's on TV. Extremely fucking lame.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 15, 2013, 01:08:02 PM Bears just pulled off a miracle.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ginaz on September 15, 2013, 01:17:50 PM Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on September 15, 2013, 02:58:17 PM Titans gave the Texans all they could handle. They are better than I thought. How bout dem Chiefs???
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 15, 2013, 03:17:36 PM The Chiefs look good, like a complete team. I liked Dontari Poe in the draft class, I'm glad to see him have a good game. The team isn't still lights-out, and I don't see them beating Denver to the division title, but if this playstyle continues I could see them as a wild card team. What else is there in the AFC? Denver looks good, Bengals and Pats look ok; Fins look markedly improved. Steelers, Texans, Ravens? Only one of those three makes the playoffs I'm sure.
I'm glad the Bills won; they played a good game. Lots of fun games overalll today I thought. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 15, 2013, 04:31:06 PM The Bills win was pretty hilarious. I expected more out of Carolina, and that was the one game that really shocked me. Chiefs beating Dallas was basically a tossup, and Philly getting in a shootout with another offensive team wasn't unexpected, but the Bears almost laying down against a bad Vikings team was :ye_gods:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on September 15, 2013, 04:34:24 PM I'll tune in next week for another episode of "Giants' guide to turning the ball over."
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 15, 2013, 05:04:57 PM So, is the under/over for the Raiders at Broncos going to be set at 150 or so? We've managed to hang 90 points on the Ravens and Giants so far.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 15, 2013, 10:29:18 PM Well, that was a beatdown.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 16, 2013, 02:17:30 AM They showed the Bears/Vikings game over here in DK, and I thought it was quite interesting to see the "new" Bears. Granted, they were playing a weaker-than-last-year Minnesota team, but here is what I noticed:
- The O-line looks better. Not great, but better. Protected Cutler well enough to at least get out of the pocket and throw (which he is actually really good at for some reason). He was pressured, but not killed. - In two years, they have gone from having a laughable receiver corps, to a fairly scary one. Marshall is a beast. That Jeffries guy looks dangerous. Martellus Bennet looks to be extremely dangerous already, and he is a big, big target. If these first two weeks weren't simply a fluke, then he may be the next great athletic TE. - Almost equally important, they have as a result given Devin Hester back his primary role as a returner. I'm not sure he even took an offensive snap? Anyway, a Devin Hester who does nothing but return kicks and punts is one dangerous motherfucker. It might fly under the radar given that he didn't take any of them to the house, but he looked on the verge of breaking one every time he touched the ball. He must have had between 250 and 300 god damn return yards. - Matt Forte is the oil that keeps that machine running. He does it all. If the O-line and receiver corps actually is as improved as it appeared yesterday, then having a guy like Forte on your team just means your defense is screwed, because you won't have the luxury of shutting down one or the other. Too many turnovers, of course. Some of them flukey, some of them where Cutler should get the blame. If they find a way to cut down on them, they would have blown Minnesota out of the stadium, rather than needing a last minute TD. Will be interesting to see it plays out for them, especially when they face Green Bay for the first time. Not because GB has a great D or anything, moreso just because they seem to have the Bears' number. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 16, 2013, 04:23:59 AM The Bears Offense is looking a LOT better than in previous years, it's far from perfect, but the fact that Jay Cutler isn't having to spend most of his game lying on the ground or running for his life is clearly helping. Kyle Long is just awesome I think. The bigger worry I'd say is the amount of points the Bears D are allowing; in previous years they've held teams down so we can win despite having a low-scoring offense. This year they haven't been able to match that so far.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 16, 2013, 04:53:56 AM For yesterday's game, their problem seemed more the result of the offense shooting itself in the dick and turning the ball over. And don't forget, there were two return TDs. Aside from those things, I felt like they were in pretty decent control. Not like in years past, perhaps, but we'll see.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 16, 2013, 08:02:57 AM Yeah, the Bears are much improved and Bennett - once he gets some chemistry with Cutler - will probably be the #3-4 TE in the league. He won't beat Graham or J Thomas, but he's too big and too good of a target in an offense that likes its big targets to not be a top 5 TE.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 16, 2013, 09:22:51 AM I've often thought the same thing of Bennett, only to watch him shit the bed for like 4 or 5 weeks in a row. He WILL disappear against a team with a decent safety. His lack of consistency is why he's on his third team.
I watched the Denver/Giants game and HOOO BOY. The Giants are such a fucking mess. Their running game had to bring Brandon Fucking Jacobs back - that ought to tell you all you need to know about the running game. At least Wilson didn't fumble again. Their defense is a whole other mess. At times they can shut people down, but I don't think they can do it for 4 consistent quarters. There's just something missing on this team that's hard to put a finger on but they will be lucky to finish 8-8 like every other team in the east. LOL COWCLOWNS. KC is not as good as their record would indicate but they are better than last year. For my thoughts on Dallas, see my thoughts on the Giants - which also mirror my thoughts on the Redskins and Eagles this year. That entire division is going to fight over who is the worst 8-8 team in the league, they'll all turn the ball over way too much and blow comfortable leads for no good goddamn reason. I'm torn now - I'm not sure who has the number 1 defense in the NFL between San Fran and Seattle. Seattle has a better defensive backfield than anybody and their front 7 are pretty good at both run defense and pass rush. San Fran's secondary might be better if their starting safety wasn't a rookie, even though he's a damn good rookie. I'm not too concerned that San Fran couldn't run the ball in their first two games. Both Seattle and Green Bay have pretty good run defense. I expect they'll do better against Indy next week and if not, then you worry. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 16, 2013, 09:25:30 AM SF is going to take a tumble in my power rankings for that performance. Every coach is going to have that film on replay for ways to make Kaepernick ineffective.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 16, 2013, 09:26:07 AM What about the Jets?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 16, 2013, 09:27:22 AM Just a shade outside the top ten this time, I think. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 16, 2013, 09:27:52 AM When your best receiver gets shut down (Boldin) AND you can't run the ball, it's hard to do much of anything. Coaches will be looking at that film for ways to shut Boldin down for sure. He was getting destroyed on bump and run coverage all night. He's not fast enough to recover from a bad release because speed has never been his game. He gets in a pocket and space and has flypaper for hands - which doesn't help you if you can't get in the space.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 16, 2013, 09:49:41 AM Well, part of the thing about shutting down Boldin is that Richard Sherman is really, really fucking good. I know he irritates the shit out of a lot of people, but he is legit. That's the only thing other coaches will see in the tape. Also, when considering the Seattle D performance, consider that Brandon Browner was absent. And so was Clemons. And so was Irvin. Anyway, there can be little doubt that Seattle has the better secondary. Lost in the fact that Browner and Sherman are talked about as the best cornerback duo is the fact that Chancellor and Thomas might also be the best Safety duo. And then it turns out that Walter Thurmond might actually also be really good.
Lost in the shuffle of it all is a linebacker group led by Bobby Wagner, who is really fucking good. I don't remember who else they have there. And Michael Bennett is playing lights out. Cliff Avril is out there too. I don't think it's even a close contest as to who has the better D. I think the question between these two teams is more on the offensive side. Will be really interesting to see what happens when these two meet again in SF. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 16, 2013, 10:44:52 AM SF is going to take a tumble in my power rankings for that performance. Every coach is going to have that film on replay for ways to make Kaepernick ineffective. I'm looking forward to your top 10! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 16, 2013, 10:54:07 AM One can only assume that the jets are now #1.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 16, 2013, 10:54:40 AM Thanks, I'm interested to see how the Bengals play tonight. That's a matchup that should favor them, but Pitt better try to right the ship after that last game where they got stoned by the Titans.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 16, 2013, 10:55:38 AM I'll be surprised if the Bengals don't win by 17 or more.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 16, 2013, 10:58:03 AM Tim Tebow rally in Jacksonville. They are just that desperate.
Pro Football Talk (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/09/16/tebow-rally-to-be-held-in-jacksonville/) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 16, 2013, 11:00:08 AM Tim Tebow rally in Jacksonville. They are just that desperate. There's always Vinny Testaverde! He's only 49 and still has plenty of game. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 16, 2013, 11:12:24 AM amusingly, 3:16 will be his TD to INT ratio if he signs there.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 16, 2013, 11:17:49 AM Vinny got more game than Tebow.
Just looked at the box score for the Jags/Raiders game from yesterday. Everyone involved in that shit show should apologize and any fans who paid money to see it should get a refund. Fuck's sake. Chad Henne had a better YPP than Pyror but lost. I'm looking at these stats and thinking "How much worse could the Jags be?" even though the Raiders were worse at least in the passing game. Then I remember that Gabbert is the guy who beat Henne out for the job during preseason AND Tebow is still without a team -and then I know how much worse it could be. At least Henne completed more than 50% of his passes. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 16, 2013, 11:50:14 AM Hell, just throw him out there and let him and the fans have their fun. It would be amusing to watch.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 16, 2013, 11:51:54 AM If there's a team he can't make worse, it's Jacksonville.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 16, 2013, 11:57:58 AM (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-1_5oZ86zZJc/UjY7etzpopI/AAAAAAAAAxM/Co8vXww6ITY/s1600/OFFTH111.gif)
Still my favorite moment from this weekend. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 16, 2013, 12:00:36 PM The entire NFC East is going to set new levels of crazy for turnovers.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on September 16, 2013, 06:50:59 PM Dont look now, but the Dolphins seem to be the best team in the AFC East. Finally seeing some swagger from the team, coaches, and fans. Please lord let this continue. And oh the irony of having a top receiving tight end in Dustin Keller get speared in the knee (knocked out for the season) only to be replaced by a hybrid fullback who's now a fantasy pick at TE.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on September 17, 2013, 01:16:19 AM Watching the Steelers O right now makes me feel kind of sympathetic for what Browns fans must endure...
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 17, 2013, 03:55:23 AM Watching the Steelers O right now makes me feel kind of sympathetic for what Browns fans must endure... :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 17, 2013, 04:00:34 AM Speaking of terrible football, at this point I am all in favor of Jacksonville aquiring and starting Tebow. Honestly. There is no downside anymore that I can see. They cannot play worse. Their attendance would improve, and they sure as hell would begin to receive more national attention than is otherwise possible for a team playing in Jacksonville. And in some parallel dimension, it could even improve the team somehow.
Of course, if that Khan guy is actually tank this team, that is another story. If so, mission fucking accomplished. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on September 17, 2013, 06:07:28 AM Khan has to be twiddling his Snidely Whiplash mustache looking for ways to position his team for a move to LA. It is the only thing that makes sense. They made pretty much zero moves to improve the team since he has taken over.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2013, 06:25:48 AM Jacksonville doesn't deserve a team. Then again neither does LA considering there are already 3 teams in California.
I'd want them in Vegas. :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2013, 07:21:15 AM Updated Power Rankings after Week 2:
1 - Denver 2 - Seattle 3 - Saints 4 - Green Bay 5 - SF 6 - Miami 7 - Chicago 8 - KC 9 - Houston 10 - San Diego Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on September 17, 2013, 08:05:11 AM Updated Power Rankings after Week 2: 1 - Denver 2 - Seattle 3 - Saints 4 - Green Bay 5 - SF 6 - Miami 7 - Chicago 8 - KC 9 - Houston 10 - San Diego Green Bay looked monster. I'd have them second, then Seattle third. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2013, 08:06:43 AM They did, but you have to temper that slightly by the fact the Redskins seem to be complete garbage right now.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 17, 2013, 08:08:39 AM And by the fact that San Fran clobbered Green Bay, and then got clobbered by Seattle. No way you can sanely put them above 5 at this point, and you cannot put them ahead of either of the other two. They may disprove it later, but for now they are not a balanced team.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2013, 08:10:03 AM San Fran didn't clobber Green Bay.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 17, 2013, 08:16:50 AM Montee is a great keeper league pickup, but not at the draft position he went in, inexplicably.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 17, 2013, 09:02:52 AM San Fran didn't clobber Green Bay. This. I mean, really. Green Bay lost by less than a fucking touchdown. By that logic, Seattle should be #1 because they actually DID clobber San Fran. Green Bay lost to a superior team, but they led at one point and where a possession or two from closing that game out. The Niners never looked like going ahead against Seattle. Of course, I wouldn't put the Saints above the Packers. They've beaten the Bucs, who are an undisciplined trainwreck with a almost good enough to franchise QB who can't stay consistent enough to actually BE a franchise QB, and an Atlanta team that has a suspect O-line. Green Bay is hands down a better team. Chicago, San Diego and KC don't deserve a spot in the top 10, though I'm not sure who I'd place above them. If I had to rank it: 1 - Denver 2 - San Fran 3 - Seattle 4 - Green Bay 5 - New England (only b/c of Brady) 6 - Houston 7 - Miami 8 - Cincy 9 - Chicago 10 - KC And I really don't feel comfortable with any of those picks after Green Bay. You could toss them all in a hat and pick at random and it'd be as likely as any other day. Chicago has a better offense but their defense doesn't seem to be that good, Cincy is too undisciplined but with a good balance of offense and defense, New England has Brady and not much else, Miami is too young a team to really go far and Houston will get better but Schaub isn't at the elite QB level of Brady, Manning and Rodgers. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 17, 2013, 09:06:31 AM I'll enjoy Denver's one week at the top before the collapse with Clady being out. D:
I think we'll be fine, really, but it's... enough for to give some worry. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 17, 2013, 09:37:39 AM Updated Power Rankings after Week 2: 1 - Denver 2 - Seattle 3 - Saints 4 - Green Bay 5 - SF 6 - Miami 7 - Chicago 8 - KC 9 - Houston 10 - San Diego Like Haemish, I'd drop the Chargers straight out of there and pop in the Bengals. Saints are not the #3 team by any stretch; they're in the 4-10 crapshoot with the other playoff-probable, but not superbowl-likely teams. Denver, SF, Seattle and GB are the only teams that look like they could contend a superbowl right now. I reckon we see most of these 10 make the playoffs (counting Bengals and NE) and then whatever team in the NFC East that manages to fail the least hard. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2013, 09:50:34 AM I originally had the Bengals in the 10th slot, but I dropped them for three reasons. First, their win over Pittsburgh isn't that impressive, even though the loss to the Bears wasn't a bad one. Second, the Chargers are 4th in the league in points scored, and the Bengals are 18th. Third, even though the defensive stats against SD are bad, they were playing against two teams in the top 5 in yardage with high powered offensive talent. Cincy played against two teams that are 30th and 14th in yards, and they still managed to drop a game. That's not great.
Also, I think the Saints are going to surprise a lot of people. Their defense is bad, but the NFC South isn't good at all this year, and their offense can bail them out of bad situations better than the Falcons and their now supremely injured line. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 17, 2013, 11:31:11 AM Fair enough; it is only week two after all.
On an unrelated note: number of sacks allowed by each team (http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/stats/teamsort/NFL/O-SCKS/2013/regular?&_3:col_1=13&_3:col_2=13). As a Bears fan, seeing only one sack on Jay Cutler is a welcome change. Jags and Browns though, sheesh. There won't be anything left of their QBs by the end of this season bar a bloody pulp at this rate. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 17, 2013, 11:44:54 AM Fair enough; it is only week two after all. On an unrelated note: number of sacks allowed by each team (http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/stats/teamsort/NFL/O-SCKS/2013/regular?&_3:col_1=13&_3:col_2=13). As a Bears fan, seeing only one sack on Jay Cutler is a welcome change. Jags and Browns though, sheesh. There won't be anything left of their QBs by the end of this season bar a bloody pulp at this rate. Think that is what Chud is going for in Cleveland. :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2013, 11:50:42 AM Usually the NFL has no really bad teams. You have teams that are rebuilding sometimes and have horrible years, but they rebound after the draft.
The Jags and Browns though? It's been since 2007 that either team has had any success. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on September 17, 2013, 01:17:46 PM You are being awfully generous to the Bucs (only 4 winning seasons and two Wild Card appearance since 2002 SB win) and the Dolphins (only 4 winning seasons and 1 Wild Card appearance since 2002). In fact, you are being unfair to the Jags by comparing them to the Browns who only have 1 winning season since 2002, the last year they made the playoffs (Wild Card loss, of course). I would never have guessed an NFL could have so many 6 or less win seasons in a 10 year period.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Cleveland_Browns_seasons Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 17, 2013, 01:24:20 PM A Super Bowl cures all ills for the Bucs. :awesome_for_real:
The Dolphins are at least on the upswing, and I think that's becoming clear this season. I still think they can win that division. EDIT: I could toss the Bills in there and probably Oakland, but those are both teams with historical modern era success somewhere in their history. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on September 17, 2013, 03:42:48 PM Updated Power Rankings after Week 2: 1 - Denver 2 - Seattle 3 - Saints 4 - Green Bay 5 - SF 6 - Miami 7 - Chicago 8 - KC 9 - Houston 10 - San Diego Pretty good list for Week 2. I'd move the Texans up to 7 and move Chicago to 9 though. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 17, 2013, 06:33:54 PM You are being awfully generous to the Bucs (only 4 winning seasons and two Wild Card appearance since 2002 SB win) and the Dolphins (only 4 winning seasons and 1 Wild Card appearance since 2002). In fact, you are being unfair to the Jags by comparing them to the Browns who only have 1 winning season since 2002, the last year they made the playoffs (Wild Card loss, of course). I would never have guessed an NFL could have so many 6 or less win seasons in a 10 year period. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Cleveland_Browns_seasons HEY! Don't you forget about 2007! HAVE YOU NO MERCY?! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 17, 2013, 11:59:12 PM San Fran didn't clobber Green Bay. Sorry, I didn't elaborate enough: their defense got clobbered. And their defense looks like it will get clobbered on a few more occasions, more than likely. This has proven to have been their achilles heel. Until they prove otherwise, that is why I would have to keep them below both Seattle and San Fran. That team is one Aaron Rodgers low-hit away from being a bottom 10 team. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 18, 2013, 07:32:43 AM I agree on GB's defense and that's why I wouldn't make them a Super Bowl pick right now.
However, and this is a serious quandry I have about the SF team, what makes you think the 49ers defense is any better? Right now they are in similar territory as Philly in PPG allowed. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 18, 2013, 09:10:43 AM So, Clady is out for the season. The dude that takes his place has not played a snap in a regular season NFL game on the OL, and we just signed Winston Justice who played primarly RT, not LT.
This is worrisome. Say what you want about the Raiders, but they are currently leading the league in sacks. Yes, seriously. I smell upset. Why? Check the stats here and see what happens to Manning on his blindside: https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/05/29/examining-pressure-qb-play/2/ Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 18, 2013, 10:22:46 AM I agree on GB's defense and that's why I wouldn't make them a Super Bowl pick right now. However, and this is a serious quandry I have about the SF team, what makes you think the 49ers defense is any better? Right now they are in similar territory as Philly in PPG allowed. I don't totally disagree with you, but they have played against a Green Bay team with Aaron Rodgers, and a Seattle team who absolutely owns them IN SEATTLE. I do think their defense is overrated....but these last two games perhaps skew things too much to the negative. Let's see where they stand 3 or 4 weeks from now. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 18, 2013, 10:35:20 AM So, Clady is out for the season. The dude that takes his place has not played a snap in a regular season NFL game on the OL, and we just signed Winston Justice who played primarly RT, not LT. This is worrisome. Say what you want about the Raiders, but they are currently leading the league in sacks. Yes, seriously. I smell upset. Why? Check the stats here and see what happens to Manning on his blindside: https://www.profootballfocus.com/blog/2013/05/29/examining-pressure-qb-play/2/ I agree with the stats as whole, but also I'm curious how much of Peyton's lack of success from left side pressure it is [partially] due to just how slow Peyton is in general. He simply can't outrun anyone, but he can use quick release to get the ball out when he sees the pressure. As for Oak leading in sacks - They've played Jac and Indy. Indy's o-line is shit, we all know that. Then, Jac is the common denominator for the two leading teams with 9.0 sacks (KC and Oak). I won't go as far as to say it will be an upset (it won't be another 50 point showing, but not an upset), but I do agree they are not to be underestimated (and can probably even be played in fantasy when playing against suspect o-lines). I don't totally disagree with you, but they have played against a Green Bay team with Aaron Rodgers, and a Seattle team who absolutely owns them IN SEATTLE. I do think their defense is overrated....but these last two games perhaps skew things too much to the negative. Let's see where they stand 3 or 4 weeks from now. Agreed, SF's defense is not in the same boat as GB's. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 18, 2013, 10:49:24 AM I agree with the stats as whole, but also I'm curious how much of Peyton's lack of success from left side pressure it is [partially] due to just how slow Peyton is in general. He simply can't outrun anyone, but he can use quick release to get the ball out when he sees the pressure. As for Oak leading in sacks - They've played Jac and Indy. Indy's o-line is shit, we all know that. Then, Jac is the common denominator for the two leading teams with 9.0 sacks (KC and Oak). I won't go as far as to say it will be an upset (it won't be another 50 point showing, but not an upset), but I do agree they are not to be underestimated (and can probably even be played in fantasy when playing against suspect o-lines). A team STILL has to have talent to capitalize on the other teams poor performance. I don't even care about them leading in sacks, but the idea of them being able to put pressure on Manning from the left all day. It'll cause errors. Manning has actually been pretty good about getting out from trouble, and has gotten quicker on his throws, so it may end up not mattering. Plus, the dude that is replacing Clady only has to do JUST ENOUGH to keep them back. But the game did go from "Oh, this is cake" to "Hmmm... this could signal something bad." But, our special teams and defense are just so good that ultimately, I think we'll come out on top easy. I just worry. Huge loss. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 18, 2013, 11:32:12 AM I don't think the SF defense is particularly overrated, it isn't a secret that our secondary is kind of weak. Maybe I'm not reading the national articles, but locally there's plenty of concern, and there was before the season started.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on September 18, 2013, 11:34:02 AM How will Williams being out affect the front 7? They are beastly.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 18, 2013, 11:49:01 AM I don't think Dorsey is a huge step down from Williams, but it's a significant problem depth-wise, as we don't have another NT on the roster at all currently. So, the starting front 7 will still be fine, I think, but there are going to be plays where we have to rotate some crappy scrap-heap player in to give Dorsey a breather and that's going to cause problems.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 18, 2013, 03:31:51 PM Wait, so I just saw a burb that the Browns traded Trent Richardson to the Colts for a draft pick?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 18, 2013, 03:33:28 PM Yup.
And now Willis McGahee is trying out for the Browns. Seriously. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 18, 2013, 03:37:28 PM The Browns may not actually be trying. I'm not sure.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 18, 2013, 03:40:20 PM Kind of odd for a trade like that to be made mid-season. Usually it's the baseball teams that make throw-in-the-towel trades during the season. I'm sure putting the entire offense on the broken thumb of Weeden will work out well for them. :awesome_for_real:
Fake edit: Oh, now I understand. They are going to suck for Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on September 18, 2013, 03:52:17 PM The Browns may not actually be trying. I'm not sure. Guess they have a bunch of draft picks. Rebuilding for twenty twenty never. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 18, 2013, 03:53:50 PM The Browns may not actually be trying. I'm not sure. They're tanking to get the first pick. :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Azuredream on September 18, 2013, 04:07:39 PM What the fuck? Am I missing something or is this one of the dumbest trades in the history of the NFL?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 18, 2013, 04:10:15 PM What the fuck? Am I missing something or is this one of the dumbest trades in the history of the NFL? Dumb in what sense? Weird, sure. But it seems to be from some of the stuff I'm reading is that Richardson never fit, and the Browns are clearly deep in "Rebuild" mode. Why not stock up on 1st round picks. You know, so you can draft more terrible first round picks and then trade/cut them a season or two later. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Azuredream on September 18, 2013, 04:13:09 PM From a Cleveland perspective, he was like.. the one guy on the team I was actually excited to watch play. If I had any faith whatsoever in our ability to draft I might not be down on this, but we're not gonna do anything with this pick we're getting. Guaranteed. Fuck, we'll have a new offense in a year or two anyway, if Richardson isn't a good fit or whatever just wait a little bit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 18, 2013, 04:46:31 PM The Browns don't need him now that their entire offense is based around Jordan Cameron :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 18, 2013, 07:15:48 PM (http://i.imgur.com/KzUhyGH.gif)
Go Tribe... :oh_i_see: So Joe Thomas better get traded next, to Denver so he can at least get a ring before he retires. I feel bad for that guy the most. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on September 18, 2013, 09:07:16 PM I don't get it, did they really only get a first rounder and that's it? How can that be the deal?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 18, 2013, 09:53:09 PM I don't get it, did they really only get a first rounder and that's it? How can that be the deal? A first rounder for a running back with a career 3.5 yards per carry average and a history of injuries is a great return. They should never have picked him at #3 in the first place, and they're set up for a great draft in 2014. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on September 19, 2013, 12:15:34 AM If nothing else, being a Steelers fan has the benefit of seeing both the Bengals and Browns trip over each other in trying to outsuck the other. The Bengals haven't moved for quite a while now though, so I guess something big is coming up there.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 19, 2013, 04:46:34 AM and they're set up for a great draft in 2014. I'm sure it will work out great for them. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 19, 2013, 05:49:16 AM I don't get it, did they really only get a first rounder and that's it? How can that be the deal? A first rounder for a running back with a career 3.5 yards per carry average and a history of injuries is a great return. They should never have picked him at #3 in the first place, and they're set up for a great draft in 2014. He has played a total of 17 games so his career stats are really lacking in datapoints to give an accurate assessment. In addition, he played those for the Browns whose offensive line consists of Joe Thomas and everyone else. As for the injuries... they are a crap shoot. Frank Gore has been fantastic for the 49ers and his outlook out of college was horrible given the fact he is walking around on supposedly glass knees. And even if Trent is only a middle of the road back, he still was the best production player on that Browns roster on the offensive side of the ball. It is looking like the organization is going to push the Browns' ineptitude to the extreme edge to see how much the fans can take, even more so than in the past. Chud just lost out on any and all goodwill the fans were going to give him for being a rookie coach, and it'll be a long road back from it. Browns... the farm team for the NFL. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2013, 06:35:26 AM It also depends on the first round pick. Indy has a playoff shot, their first rounder value might be very low.
Anyway, it's a white flag move. They are giving up two games into the season, and declaring themselves in the draft business. I'm not sure of the commissioner powers, but I would veto the trade because whoever plays the Browns from this point forward is getting free wins. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 19, 2013, 07:29:57 AM The NFL proudly presents Jacksonville vs Cleveland in a death race to Los Angeles! :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 19, 2013, 07:38:53 AM From a Cleveland perspective, he was like.. the one guy on the team I was actually excited to watch play. If I had any faith whatsoever in our ability to draft I might not be down on this, but we're not gonna do anything with this pick we're getting. Guaranteed. Fuck, we'll have a new offense in a year or two anyway, if Richardson isn't a good fit or whatever just wait a little bit. Sure, you'll do something with 2 first round picks. You'll draft a sure-to-bust first round QB to replace Weeden (who replaced the busted first round pick Colt McCoy after 2 years) and continue to suck. I can't fathom a world where 2 games into the season, this was anything other than a "tank the season" move. Sure, they get an extra first rounder, but it really does just blow up their entire team. And now apparently Weeden is hurt and to replace him they have their third string guy starting instead of Jason Campbell. A factory of sadness indeed. EDIT: Also, Cleveland can't be in the race to Los Angeles. The NFL basically promised Cleveland a franchise when the Browns became the Ravens. It's too soon to let some jackass move them out now. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 19, 2013, 07:49:41 AM Was this a salary move? If I were the Cleveland owner, I'd look at my team, realize that I don't have a chance in hell at reaching the playoffs, and immediately get rid of anything I had with a salary. It's like a new movie: Major League: the NFL.
(http://i95.photobucket.com/albums/l142/gstatejester/major-leaguelou-brown.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 19, 2013, 07:56:26 AM Richardson was on the rookie scale. It can't have been that much money, probably less than they'd have to pay McGahee.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2013, 08:10:25 AM Apparently they didn't even tell Richardson. He found out on the radio.
I mean FFS. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on September 19, 2013, 08:13:49 AM EDIT: Also, Cleveland can't be in the race to Los Angeles. The NFL basically promised Cleveland a franchise when the Browns became the Ravens. It's too soon to let some jackass move them out now. I am pretty sure that the franchise agreement the owners of the Browns have with the NFL requires them to stay in Cleveland for a very long time. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 19, 2013, 08:15:13 AM Richardson was on the rookie scale. It can't have been that much money, probably less than they'd have to pay McGahee. :uhrr: Ok... I don't get it then. Was he coming up for a contract renewal? Do they know something that the league doesn't that might cause him to significantly lose value? Of course, it could just be that the Cleveland owners are morons. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2013, 08:21:48 AM They have no QB. In this league that means you have no hope. They are tanking for the Johnny Manziel / Teddy Bridgewater sweepstakes and grabbing an extra pick in the hopes they can get a line guy to block for him.
They don't need a RB. In the NFL today, almost nobody needs an RB unless you have a good QB already. AP is the best RB in the league, and that team can't win because their QB is garbage. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 19, 2013, 08:22:35 AM I think Manziel has bust written all over him. But go ahead Cleveland, pick him up.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 19, 2013, 08:41:02 AM I think both of those guys have a shot to be very good- Bridgewater moreso, because he doesn't appear to be an infantile jackass, but whatever.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 19, 2013, 08:42:52 AM I think Manziel has bust written all over him. But go ahead Cleveland, pick him up. I agree. The guy is a talent to be sure, but I don't think he has the temperment or aptitude to play at the NFL level. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 19, 2013, 08:54:44 AM You have to look at a guy like Russel Wilson and think that it's possible for a quick guy that may be atypical to succeed in the league. Manziel has a hell of an arm. If he can just get his head screwed on straight and try to improve he could be good.
I think Bridgewater could be awesome. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2013, 08:57:26 AM I think his head is on just fine to play football. The media makes him into some sort of unholy demon, yet I'm pretty sure the kid hasn't had any problems with the law besides a fake ID charge.
The rest of it is just them clutching their pearls over how he wants to get paid. He would have left for the NFL last year, but it's not allowed, so what the hell do you expect? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 19, 2013, 09:00:21 AM Maybe it is, maybe it isn't. He seems just like Vince Young to me (for off field antics), and we saw what happened there.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 19, 2013, 09:10:47 AM I think Manziel is another David Carr waiting to happen. Athletic guy that will get destroyed behind a terrible offensive line.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 19, 2013, 09:30:52 AM Ok... I don't get it then. Was he coming up for a contract renewal? Do they know something that the league doesn't that might cause him to significantly lose value? According to this article (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9692758/cleveland-browns-begin-task-hiding-trent-richardson-past), this save them a total of $6.6 million. Quote The Browns will save $6.6 million by trading Richardson to the Indianapolis Colts in exchange for a first-round draft pick in 2014. Including his signing bonus, the Browns paid the running back -- taken third overall in 2012 -- $13.8 million for what amounted to 17 games. So his contract was about $19-$20 million for a first round back - probably a 4-year contract. In other words, peanuts compared to veteran pay scale. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 19, 2013, 09:56:33 AM I think Manziel is another David Carr waiting to happen. Athletic guy that will get destroyed behind a terrible offensive line. They aren't really that similar. Carr rushed for a total of 125 yards in his entire career at Fresno. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 19, 2013, 10:02:43 AM From a Cleveland perspective, he was like.. the one guy on the team I was actually excited to watch play. If I had any faith whatsoever in our ability to draft I might not be down on this, but we're not gonna do anything with this pick we're getting. Guaranteed. Fuck, we'll have a new offense in a year or two anyway, if Richardson isn't a good fit or whatever just wait a little bit. Sure, you'll do something with 2 first round picks. You'll draft a sure-to-bust first round QB to replace Weeden (who replaced the busted first round pick Colt McCoy after 2 years) and continue to suck. I can't fathom a world where 2 games into the season, this was anything other than a "tank the season" move. Sure, they get an extra first rounder, but it really does just blow up their entire team. And now apparently Weeden is hurt and to replace him they have their third string guy starting instead of Jason Campbell. A factory of sadness indeed. EDIT: Also, Cleveland can't be in the race to Los Angeles. The NFL basically promised Cleveland a franchise when the Browns became the Ravens. It's too soon to let some jackass move them out now. http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/23717233/photo-browns-jersey-illustrates-clevelands-qb-problem-over-the-years In fact, if you really want a laugh, look at every draft pick from the Browns since 1999. I think I can count 4 good picks over that time period... Alex Mack, Joe Thomas, D'Qwell Jackson, and Joe Haden... and maybe Phil Taylor. I get that every team has draft troubles because hey, it is a form of gambling. But no team has had this much draft failure in the league. Already shelved all my Browns gear and will probably wear out my LSU gear since it will be on double duty. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on September 19, 2013, 10:09:37 AM A 1st round pick for Richardson seems ridiculously high to me. The Browns made out like bandits (draft prowess notwithstanding).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2013, 10:11:21 AM It looks that way, but again I hate the idea of a team literally tanking the season in the second week. It's shit like this that got the NBA lottery put in place.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 19, 2013, 10:15:50 AM I don't think it is high at all. Think about it this way, the Colts will probably draft in the first round middle to late next year. Is anyone available at that pick better than Trent Richardson? Probably not.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 19, 2013, 10:25:53 AM I can almost guarantee that in five years we are going to look at this deal and think that the Colts made out like bandits.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 19, 2013, 10:26:22 AM It looks that way, but again I hate the idea of a team literally tanking the season in the second week. It's shit like this that got the NBA lottery put in place. Agree wholeheartedly. It ruins the integrity of the game when a team deliberately attempts to win the draft pick by putting an inferior product on the field, intentionally. You should never play for a higher draft pick no matter how dire the season's outcome looks. Sorry, but I can't see any defense in this move even with another first round draft pick. History is what it is and it says the Browns cannot pick a first round player and NOT have them bust (save Thomas and Haden). So next year they go grab a 'franchise' quarterback with a first round pick they were going to have anyway. Teams will just defend against him since the Browns will have no one in the backfield to hand the ball off to and a shitty line blocking...again. In the mean time, the Colts have both a star QB and RB now. Fuck this team and fuck me for being born into the area that makes me a fan by birthright. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 19, 2013, 10:29:25 AM As good as Richardson is, it's one player.
They'll be "okay" with McGahee and their others... Richardson wasn't going to get them to where they needed to be, so they saw the chance at getting a good value draft pick and are moving towards getting, probably, a new QB (again). It's not like they are unloading their roster. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2013, 10:49:08 AM It's not like they are unloading their roster. Yet. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 19, 2013, 10:50:00 AM How would they unload their roster? Is there anyone else worth having?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 19, 2013, 11:04:05 AM How would they unload their roster? Is there anyone else worth having? This, in a nut shell. On offense, he was it. Weeden? No one saw that as a good pick in the first place and he has proven to be less than stellar even with Norv's offense that was suppose to suit him better. Browns have not had a named receiver since... um, Webster Slaughter? Our best offensive weapon is a lineman - so that should say something. They are selling the offensive farm for a lottery ticket. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 19, 2013, 11:08:24 AM Guys, I really think you are overvaluing Richardson, maybe based on his fantasy production. He did have a lot of TDs last year, but he's otherwise very average, and not a good fit at all for a Norv Turner offense. Also note that nobody that drafted him is in charge of the team now. They can replace him with a later round pick just fine. Stockpiling picks to rebuild the team while not giving up anything important is a really good move for a team in Cleveland's position. I'd go so far as to say that I think Indy overpaid a bit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 19, 2013, 11:24:26 AM How would they unload their roster? Is there anyone else worth having? Joe Thomas is one of the best left tackles in the game. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 19, 2013, 11:24:44 AM I place little value on Richardson. I place even less value on the Brown's capability to draft well and field a decent team. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 19, 2013, 11:27:27 AM How would they unload their roster? Is there anyone else worth having? Joe Thomas is one of the best left tackles in the game. And they're going to keep him, because he really DOES have a lot of value. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 19, 2013, 11:29:57 AM I can almost guarantee that in five years we are going to look at this deal and think that the Colts made out like bandits. I already think that now. :awesome_for_real: EDIT: To add to this, I think Indy makes out well because he gives them another weapon they don't have since Vick Ballard got injured. He's a decent running back who can catch the ball. That fits an Indy offense perfectly. He doesn't have to run more than 3.5 yards a carry (and he should get more with Indy because of the danger of their passing game). I think he instantly makes that team better even if Ballard was healthy. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 19, 2013, 11:34:33 AM As weak as the AFC is, the Colts should have a draft pick that's pretty late in the round. It's always better to take a known commodity than a draft gamble unless you are trying to build depth at another position.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 19, 2013, 11:36:40 AM As soon as some Broncos fans saw the Richardson thing, they immediately started talking about the idea of Broncos unloading a draft pick for Joe Thomas, with Clady being lost for the season.
As far as value, they have Greg Little, Davone Bess and Cameron who would be fine for a late round pick. Do they have the ability to pull in any other higher round picks besides Richardson and/or Thomas? No, of course not. "Unload" doesn't really imply value. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 19, 2013, 11:42:08 AM Guys, I really think you are overvaluing Richardson, maybe based on his fantasy production. He did have a lot of TDs last year, but he's otherwise very average, and not a good fit at all for a Norv Turner offense. Also note that nobody that drafted him is in charge of the team now. They can replace him with a later round pick just fine. Stockpiling picks to rebuild the team while not giving up anything important is a really good move for a team in Cleveland's position. I'd go so far as to say that I think Indy overpaid a bit. And again, last year was under Shurmur and his predictable offense, he was a rookie, and hurt and still managed almost 1k yards on that team. I think the jury is still out on his value overall - though I agree he is injured a lot ever since college. I'm assuming he'll be huge in a better called offense and having a better QB. I think teams playing the colts now have to consider the run and the pass a threat - something no Browns opponent had to do since he was the only threat on the field. And I think Joe Thomas is second guessing that 7-year contract (with 5 to go) for a team that is not even rebuilding at this point, just in a constant state of dumb. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 19, 2013, 11:45:23 AM As soon as some Broncos fans saw the Richardson thing, they immediately started talking about the idea of Broncos unloading a draft pick for Joe Thomas, with Clady being lost for the season. As far as value, they have Greg Little, Davone Bess and Cameron who would be fine for a late round pick. Do they have the ability to pull in any other higher round picks besides Richardson and/or Thomas? No, of course not. "Unload" doesn't really imply value. You could not give Greg Little away and he would probably kill a package deal with any team. He is actually worse than Braylon was in the drops dept. Davone Bess is the best receiver the Browns have unless Gordon steps up. I don't see any of that happening because Hoyer will never have the option of passing the ball facing non-stop blitzes till he gets a concussion. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 19, 2013, 11:45:32 AM It's always better to take a known commodity than a draft gamble unless you are trying to build depth at another position. I think this is demonstrably not true. Tim Tebow is a known commodity, QED. :why_so_serious: The main point though is that outside of Adrian Peterson type players (which Richardson is not), RBs are very replaceable. In fact I'd say other than kickers/punters they're the MOST replaceable position. They also don't last very long, iirc they have the shortest average career of any position. If you know you're not going to be going anywhere for a couple years, a 22 year old RB could very easily be out of the league when your rebuilding efforts pay off 3 years down the road. Turning him into a pick that could easily be a starting lineman of some kind? I'd pull the trigger just about every time. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 19, 2013, 11:47:23 AM I'm always a bit shocked when running backs are taken high. They are injury prone and tend to flame out quickly.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 19, 2013, 12:16:48 PM You could not give Greg Little away and he would probably kill a package deal with any team. He is actually worse than Braylon was in the drops dept. Davone Bess is the best receiver the Browns have unless Gordon steps up. I don't see any of that happening because Hoyer will never have the option of passing the ball facing non-stop blitzes till he gets a concussion. I already said I don't see them unloading their team, so I'm not interested in an actual argument over the actual perceived value of Browns players. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2013, 12:26:35 PM They still have $27M in cap space according to one site. Soooooooo, yeah.
They can sign some replacements and redo this. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 19, 2013, 12:41:10 PM Browns just formalized the McGahee signing, who will do good for them.
https://twitter.com/InsideNFLMedia/status/380821074843168768 Quote "I talked to [Browns OT] Joe Thomas a little bit earlier. He said, 'Hey look, we are all on the trading block now.'" Now, I know that it's likely shock talking, but... still interesting to hear. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2013, 03:47:54 PM New GM, new plans, no QB?
He's right. Except for Joe, because he's immovable with his contract and his value. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on September 19, 2013, 06:08:53 PM So there is no way to watch these Thursday night games unless its a local team or you have NFL Network on your cable box?
NFL.com does this weird live commentary thing but no live Thursday stream. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 19, 2013, 07:27:59 PM So there is no way to watch these Thursday night games unless its a local team or you have NFL Network on your cable box? NFL.com does this weird live commentary thing but no live Thursday stream. Nfl.com/tnf has options. There are also... Other means like atdhe or firstrowsports, but definitely install an ad locker before hand. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 19, 2013, 10:35:18 PM I don't think we know yet how good of an RB Richardson is or isn't. 3.5 YPC...if you break out your Cleveland Browns to Any Other Franchise conversion table, that roughly equates to 6 YPC. What I am saying is that all Cleveland Browns skill position players are automatically worse than their counterparts on any other team, simply by being surrounded by ineptitude. I am not even joking a little.
That said, there are only a small handful of "special" RBs in this league. AP, Lynch, Forte, probably McCoy. Two years ago I would have put Gore, MJD, Rice and CJ2K on the list, but not anymore. Did I miss anyone? The rest of them are totally replacable. Decent RBs grow on trees. The problem with this trade as far I am concerned has only a little to do with the value of what they might be giving it up. It is moreso the message they are sending. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 20, 2013, 06:59:53 AM So the Chiefs are 3-0, and their next three opponents are the Giants, Titans, and Raiders.
Anyone want to make bets on the 6-0 chiefs? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 20, 2013, 07:02:07 AM 5-1, they'll drop a game somewhere due to offense.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on September 20, 2013, 08:24:37 AM Cablevision carries NFL Network. I didn't even know until I checked earlier in the week. Of course, I expected a much better performance from my Eagles. Ugh. That looked like last year. The Chiefs are not good. They managed 4 turnovers, 3 of them providing fantastic field position and they still couldn't put the game away.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 20, 2013, 08:45:32 AM I put that up to the Philly defense. It's got holes, but you guys have a decent pass rush. The Chiefs aren't Super Bowl caliber, but they are a decent team with good playmakers like Charles.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on September 20, 2013, 02:44:20 PM So the Chiefs are 3-0, and their next three opponents are the Giants, Titans, and Raiders. Anyone want to make bets on the 6-0 chiefs? No. This is the NFL. Giants and Titans both have good chances to beat them. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 22, 2013, 08:40:17 AM Von Miller tried to cheat the system, had help from tester (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9707976/von-miller-denver-broncos-urine-collector-tried-cheat-test)
:uhrr: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on September 22, 2013, 11:02:53 AM You think Cleveland's front office is going "NO STAHP!"
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 22, 2013, 12:49:16 PM Missed this during the morning's news:
Cleveland fielding offers for and open to trading WRs Josh Gordon and Greg Little. At least one team has made a quality offer for Gordon. (https://twitter.com/AdamSchefter/status/381794762652545024) $5 says that team is the Patriots. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 22, 2013, 12:52:54 PM Actually, Philly came to mind when I saw that. After DeSean Jackson they have garbage for receivers.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 22, 2013, 12:57:54 PM Actually, Philly came to mind when I saw that. After DeSean Jackson they have garbage for receivers. As opposed to New England's great roster of receivers so far this season. New England always ends up with draft picks, so I figued they would be the most likely to jump, plus Brady has apparently been quite unhappy with the receiver corps(e) and quite vocal about that. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on September 22, 2013, 01:38:26 PM Great afternoon of football!
The Lions break a 21 game streak and, for the first time in franchise history, beat the Redskins at D.C. A good game, but the Lions defense really needs to improve if they want to challenge GB. Speaking of the Pack, oops! You don't just stroll into Cincy like you own the place. Well, you did in the past, but my pick for the AFC North champs really did a gut check to a puzzled GB team. A lot of teams will be studying that film. GB thou art mortal. And 1-2. How bout dem Browns??? Mind=blown. Sure it was against the Viqueens, but I'd say the Browns will take the win. Great ending. Titans beat the Bolts. Titans flying under the radar and the Bolts are the Bolts. Giants thrown bodily out of Charlotte. I don't get the Giants. Don't know if they are a good team that does bad things or a bad team that does good things. Crazy afternoon. Best hit of the day=Pam Oliver getting 'run over' by the marching band. Seriously? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 22, 2013, 04:03:49 PM SF getting dump trucked in their own house.
I'm not sure what to think about them anymore. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on September 22, 2013, 04:07:34 PM For once in my life I'm glad I no longer live in an area of the country that shows Giants games and that I therefore didn't have to witness this travesty.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 22, 2013, 04:08:00 PM SF getting dump trucked in their own house. I'm not sure what to think about them anymore. What I'm thinking is we could really use Josh Gordon. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 22, 2013, 04:59:28 PM Well the Jets won. Back in the top 10?
Maybe! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on September 22, 2013, 05:38:10 PM Not top 10. Geno had some good looks today, but Jesus, the penalties. And there're still the two interceptions.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 23, 2013, 12:00:12 AM While it was a bad weekend for picking the winners, it was overall just a delicious day of games.
Miami is 3 and 0? And Atlanta is 1 and 2? I like. New Orleans...shoot, I don't know. The only sorta good team they have played is Atlanta, and obviously the Falcons are not in a good place right now. Plus, they had Sean-Payton-returning-fairies supporting them during that game. I think we need to see what happens when a real offense puts them to the test. Which, hysterically, might be Chicago? I think they will squeak out a win over Miami at home next week. Andrew Luck goes in and beats his old coach? I like, even if I don't like Luck. This is some bad joo-joo for San Fran. I suddenly think they are in deep shit. Seattle may have broken them. Hope for their sake that they have a few tomato cans lined up for the next few games. Speaking of Seattle, maybe, just maybe, that offense is on track now. We'll see. If so, watch out. Giants get curb-stomped in Carolina. I don't hate the Giants, but I am tired of them, so good. I don't like that the Cowboys won, because now we have to talk about them. At least DeMarco Murray earned me a couple fantasy points for a change. Chicago now 3 and 0 after putting a beatdown on Pittsburgh, who are still winless. So delicious. Note that behind Denver, Chicago has the highest PPG average after three games. Can we stop talking about how great RG3 is now? Because without that extra gear, he is a below average QB. He may never be the same player he was last year...even if he heals (and make no mistake, he is not healed), they may not let him. And thus he will fade away. I shoulda known Andy Reid would go in and win in Philly. Karma, or something. I always seem to find some reason to pick the Eagles to win their games, but I never seem to learn. Houston is giving up a looooooooot of points. It isn't surprising that they lost in Baltimore, because the Ravens still seem to have a good home field advantage there. But it IS surprising that they got taken to the woodshed like that, especially considering Baltimore's struggles. Both of these teams are 2 and 1, but there is no reason to feel good about either of them IMO. It is bad for the league that New England is 3 and 0. Because at some point, Gronk comes back, Amendola's vagina heals, Pats pick up a free agent receiver, and then BAM. Suddenly they will be potent again. We can't even blame it on the division they're in, at least not yet. Jets are 2 and 1? Who is letting that happen? And even worse, how are things looking for them if Geno stops doing stupid shit? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on September 23, 2013, 06:32:39 AM Great afternoon of football! The Lions break a 21 game streak and, for the first time in franchise history, beat the Redskins at D.C. A good game, but the Lions defense really needs to improve if they want to challenge Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on September 23, 2013, 06:49:25 AM I just hope Sanchez's career is FINALLY over.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on September 23, 2013, 07:01:01 AM I don't know what happened over the weekend. I mean, I watched some football but I don't understand some things.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 23, 2013, 07:52:04 AM I didn't understand the final play in the Chargers-Titans game
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 23, 2013, 08:04:48 AM I didn't understand the final play in the Chargers-Titans game Didn't watch the game, but tracked down a video. What don't you get? http://www.nydailynews.com/sports/football/chargers-loss-wacky-eight-lateral-play-article-1.1464157 Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 23, 2013, 08:08:01 AM I didn't understand the final play in the Chargers-Titans game Best understood when set to the theme of Benny Hill. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 23, 2013, 08:19:53 AM I don't like that the Cowboys won, because now we have to talk about them. At least DeMarco Murray earned me a couple fantasy points for a change. HOW BOUT DEM COWBOYS! :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on September 23, 2013, 09:03:41 AM Yea, how about those Panthers? :uhrr:
Fucking Eli. And fucking refs in the ATL-MIA game. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on September 23, 2013, 09:21:17 AM This is hilarious:
(http://i.minus.com/ibzMoLEQ6cnZEJ.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 23, 2013, 09:56:56 AM What a disturbing weekend of football.
San Francisco is vulnerable because against a competent defensive backfield, NOBODY can get open. Boldin isn't fast enough to create separation, especially if Vernon Davis isn't in the lineup to take some pressure off of him, and they got NOTHING behind Boldin worth a shit yet. More worrisome is that their running game isn't taking any pressure off Kap. That team better find a wideout in a hurry before Seattle runs away with the division. On the other hand, their defense doesn't look stifling anymore, especially when they are on the field for 3 quarters out of 4 because their offense can't move the ball. Houston is just not a very good football team this year. Something is missing both offensively and defensively. They should have DOMINATED that game with the way Flacco was playing but they couldn't finish drives at all. Suddenly one INT and one punt return in 2 minutes takes them from 6 points up to 9 points behind. They should not have allowed as many points to any of the teams they've faced this year and yet they have. Ed Reed is not the answer to their questions on defense. DeAndre Hopkins does look a proper wideout though but if Andre Johnson is hurt like he always is, this team is going to struggle on offense. Green Bay... just... FUCK. They have got to learn to cover somebody. Oh and don't cough up the fucking ball 4 times in a game. They aren't so good they can overcome stupid turnovers. Chicago is not as good as their record indicates, but if the Packers are going to give away games like this, it won't matter. Also, Chicago needs to beat a really good team - so far they've beaten two bad teams (Minny and Pittsburgh) and one decent but not Super Bowl team (Cincy). But looking at the Bears schedule, the best teams they play are Green Bay (twice), Detroit (twice) and New Orleans. They win at least 2 of those games and they have got the division sewn up. Fuck New England. If Cleveland does trade them Josh Gordon, it'll be because they hate every other team in the league and want to watch New England choke in a Super Bowl. If so, FUCK CLEVELAND. Though really, beating up on Tampa Bay right now is like kicking a cripple. Jets should not be 2-1 but really, Buffalo should have done better. Their defense is BAD - that winning TD to Holmes should never have been caught by that cornerback had TERRIBAD coverage. Miami may be one of the better teams in the AFC. Not as good as Denver, but better than the Ravens who are really NOT GOOD. Shut down Torrey Smith, you can beat the Ravens because Flacco. Smith got going yesterday and they got two lucky returns, game over. If I were doing power rankings right now, it's Denver #1, Seattle #2. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on September 23, 2013, 10:27:02 AM Houston is just not a very good football team this year. Something is missing both offensively and defensively. They should have DOMINATED that game with the way Flacco was playing but they couldn't finish drives at all. Suddenly one INT and one punt return in 2 minutes takes them from 6 points up to 9 points behind. They should not have allowed as many points to any of the teams they've faced this year and yet they have. Ed Reed is not the answer to their questions on defense. DeAndre Hopkins does look a proper wideout though but if Andre Johnson is hurt like he always is, this team is going to struggle on offense. Houston was like that last year too. They're just don't seem like they want to win football games. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on September 23, 2013, 10:46:05 AM I'm am very disappointed at the lack of Eli Faces in this thread after that game.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 23, 2013, 10:47:45 AM I'm am very disappointed at the lack of Eli Faces in this thread after that game. Here's a Coughlin Face. (http://cdn0.sbnation.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/19989433/gyi0061611504.0_standard_352.0.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on September 23, 2013, 11:20:34 AM I'm am very disappointed at the lack of Eli Faces in this thread after that game. Be careful or you will get goatce or however the hell one spells it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on September 23, 2013, 02:59:45 PM This is all I have:
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/85916/Manning-gets-rocked2.gif) (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/85916/eli_manning_interceptionface-82419.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 23, 2013, 03:27:18 PM TD ref racing by takes the last one from :awesome_for_real: to :drill:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 23, 2013, 07:18:47 PM TD ref racing by takes the last one from :awesome_for_real: to :drill: Didn't see it till I read your post... thanks :drill: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 23, 2013, 07:24:10 PM Ah, yes. Pacman Jones was arrested again. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 23, 2013, 08:43:12 PM I love this Broncos team.
127 Points over three weeks, 12 TDs, no INTs.... NOM NOM NOM. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on September 24, 2013, 08:13:07 AM TD ref racing by takes the last one from :awesome_for_real: to :drill: For me it's the dude clapping in the background when he looks towards Eli for a split second I love this Broncos team. 127 Points over three weeks, 12 TDs, no INTs.... NOM NOM NOM. Yeah, just wow. Nothing else to be said about that offense. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 24, 2013, 08:21:07 AM Denver is the best team in the league right now with Seattle a close but unsure second. There's no other teams in the league I EXPECT to win any game they play. Of course, they will lose one eventually, but right now, I wouldn't best against either team. Until some of the supposedly better teams in the league get healthy or get consistent (I'm looking at you, Pats, Pack and 49ers), that's just how it is. I'm actually kind of surprised how well Pryor did against a really good defense that forced him to stay in the pocket. He may be better than I thought but he is on a really shitty team with no one to throw to and no defense.
Tuesday Morning Power Ratings: 1. Denver 2. Seattle 3. New England 4. Miami 5. New Orleans 6. San Francisco 7. Green Bay 8. Chicago 9. Kansas City 10. Cinncinatti 3-10 could be jumbled up in a fucking hat and picked at random and would probably be just as accurate. Yes, I feel bad about putting 2 1-2 teams ahead of two 3-0 teams but neither team has convinced me they are solid yet. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 24, 2013, 08:29:05 AM I can't argue much with your logic. Based on this year alone, I probably would put Chicago a bit higher, the Pack a bit lower, and San Fran a bit lower, but no biggie. But I do think you have to open up beyond just the past three games, and for that reason I would probably move Miami down a bit as well. Fuck, I dunno. One thing I do know is that I wish we could see Denver's offense against Seattle's defense right now. I am honestly not sure what would happen. On paper, Seattle has the tools to foil Peyton, but in reality Peyton is so fucking good he might overcome it anyway. On the other side of the coin, though, I think Seattle's offense could stick it to Denver's D, so for that reason I might give Seattle a slight edge. We may never know.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 24, 2013, 08:34:20 AM Fuck, I dunno. This should be the NFL's catchphrase for this season. Chicago and KC and even Cincy would be higher on my list of the opponents they'd beaten were teams I considered to be good. Chicago beat Minny (terribad even with the world's great RB), Cincy (who are good but should have won that game) and Pittsburgh (who are old and BAD). KC beat Philly (turnover heaven), Dallas (also a weak, inconsistent team) and Jacksonville (so bad Chad Henne is their QB). Any of those 3-10 teams could lay an absolute egg though they'll probably all make the playoffs. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 24, 2013, 08:35:04 AM But what about the Jets? :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 24, 2013, 08:37:50 AM Right now, the broncos are almost dead last in Pass D, but that's mostly because of garbage time. And, as a reminder, we still don't have Bailey or Von. Once we have our pass rush back, we're golden. We fared a LOT better than I thought we would without Clady to protect Manning's blindside. Oh, and Decker was playing with a separated should the first two weeks. Broncos are seemingly getting healthier. Provided we can keep it that way... okay, forget it I can't be unbiased if I tried at this point.
All I know is I want to lose a game, and lose it badly and put a chip back on the shoulder of the team. Keep these kids humble a bit. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 24, 2013, 08:55:22 AM Tuesday Power Rankings from Paelos:
1 - Denver 2 - Seattle 3 - Chicago 4 - Saints 5 - Miami 6 - KC 7 - Pats 8 - Dallas 9 - Cincy 10 - Indy Both SF and GB drop out this week. I can't say for sure these are the same teams we've seen in the past, and I won't rank them up there on last season. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 24, 2013, 09:21:11 AM Jets are too low.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 24, 2013, 09:24:44 AM Jets are lucky they are still rated as an NFL team but I guess they have the Jags to look down on.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on September 24, 2013, 10:07:13 AM Right now, I think the Jets are looking down at the Giants.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 24, 2013, 11:04:19 AM I considered putting the Jets back in the top 10 just to make waves, but when you make 20 penalties in one game? That's unheard of.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on September 24, 2013, 12:58:15 PM Ah, yes. Pacman Jones was arrested again. :why_so_serious: No he wasn't. He went out on his birthday and his buddy was too drunk to drive (stupid, why do pro players hate hiring town cars?) they got pulled over and Pacman got a ticket for being mouthy towards a cop. Which, not having been a black rich athlete myself I can only assume isn't a hard ticket to end up with. So yeah. He got a ticket. For talking back. I'm sure Goodell will suspend him but that will be utter bullshit. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 24, 2013, 01:10:15 PM Full credit to Rex Ryan, the Jets D still looks passably good in this league right now. He needs to ditch the HC job so he can go win a superbowl as D coordinator somewhere.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 24, 2013, 01:13:25 PM Tuesday Power Rankings from Paelos: 1 - Denver 2 - Seattle 3 - Chicago 4 - Saints 5 - Miami 6 - KC 7 - Pats 8 - Dallas 9 - Cincy 10 - Indy Both SF and GB drop out this week. I can't say for sure these are the same teams we've seen in the past, and I won't rank them up there on last season. You don't think SF or GB could beat the teams from Miami down 80% of the time? I don't like your list. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 24, 2013, 01:24:23 PM (http://i.imgur.com/73W4CWK.jpg) (http://imgur.com/73W4CWK)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on September 24, 2013, 01:27:06 PM (http://i.imgur.com/73W4CWK.jpg) (http://imgur.com/73W4CWK) ...on your phone! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 24, 2013, 02:26:15 PM You don't think SF or GB could beat the teams from Miami down 80% of the time? I don't like your list. Right now? No, I don't think it's better than 50/50 on home or road. GB's defense is no better than Atlanta, and their offense has only won a single game for them so far. SF got destroyed by a team that lost to Miami at home. It could change, but a lot of what we're assuming about these teams isn't about the teams this year yet. We're waiting for them to look like last year and they haven't. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on September 25, 2013, 07:42:12 AM I tend to perceive power rankings as those teams that I see having the strongest chance of getting to the Super Bowl. That doesn't do much for week-to-week strength, so that may be why our opinion differs.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 25, 2013, 08:31:06 AM That's certainly one view of power rankings. I think if that's the case though, we should rank 1-4 and the rest is just a crapshoot.
I feel pretty good about my top 4 atm, and their chances. I don't really like any team in the AFC right now except the Broncos. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 25, 2013, 07:45:32 PM So Brett Favre's agent says that he can still play:
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000250156/article/brett-favre-still-could-play-in-nfl-agent-bus-cook-says Apparently he is the local blacksmith now. This is pretty much a non-story but I find it hilarious because idiot fans here in Minneapolis are all amped because they think this means he is coming back to the Vikings to save their shitty season. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 26, 2013, 02:57:37 PM I thought that this was a cool statistic - Tom Brady is 139-39 for his career, the first QB to have a +100 win differential (http://www.reddit.com/r/nfl/comments/1n6ep1/at_13939_tom_brady_is_first_qb_in_history_to_have/)
Peyton is on +84, with a career record of 156-70. It's tempting to say that his win percentage is inflated by an easy division, but it breaks down from 77% overall to 81% against other AFC east teams (52-12) and 76% against the rest of the NFL (87-27) Relevant wikipedia article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Most_wins_by_a_starting_quarterback_(NFL)) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on September 26, 2013, 03:03:47 PM Slight typo: Pats are AFC East, not NFC.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on September 26, 2013, 03:07:13 PM It's become vogue to hate on the Patriots and they've fallen off a bit over the past few years in terms of raw power, but some people just forget how damned good they were for a long time. Like a LONG time.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 26, 2013, 03:30:58 PM Slight typo: Pats are AFC East, not NFC. Whoops, fixed. Cheers. It's become vogue to hate on the Patriots and they've fallen off a bit over the past few years in terms of raw power, but some people just forget how damned good they were for a long time. Like a LONG time. People hate dynasties I guess, for the same reason that people that people root for the underdogs maybe? I'm not even sure it's a case of past-tense either; the Pats (although not rock solid) are still a very good team. I think the positive thing to consider is that right now we are fortunate to get to see arguably the two best NFL QBs in history (Brady and Manning Sr.) playing. There are other elite QBs in the League, but I don't think they will leave behind quite as many ridiculous records as those two. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 26, 2013, 04:09:56 PM People hated the Steelers in the 70s, the Niners in the 80s, the Cowboys in the 90s, and the Pats in the 00s.
Thing is, you just don't see dynasties as much with the salary cap the way it is, and the QB sucking up such a huge part of it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 26, 2013, 04:10:46 PM You can't fool me, nobody hated Joe Montana.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 26, 2013, 04:11:42 PM You can't fool me, nobody hated Joe Montana. :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 26, 2013, 04:12:08 PM Clarification: Cowboys fans aren't people.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 26, 2013, 04:16:25 PM Clarification: Cowboys fans aren't people. We can't help that we've risen above the normal human. :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 26, 2013, 05:44:43 PM People "hate" on the Patriots for plenty of reasons.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 26, 2013, 10:18:21 PM You can't fool me, nobody hated Joe Montana. It's possible not to have hated him, yet still wished for him to fracture every bone in his body. Question: If Texas ultimately does split off from the rest of the federation, can they please take the Cowboys with them? Thanks. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 27, 2013, 12:27:23 AM Better would be to relocate them to LA and rename them something and declare all the franchise records invalid.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 27, 2013, 01:49:43 AM And make sure to name them something as anti-Texan and un-Cowboyish as possible, just to rub it in. The LA Hipsters, or something. Anaheim Democrats. Los Angelos Metrosexuals.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on September 27, 2013, 04:09:31 AM The West Hollywood Transexuals. The entire city of Dallas would have an aneurysm at the same time.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 27, 2013, 05:45:58 AM I was going to go with Hollywood Homosexuals, but I didn't want to unintentionally offend someone. Still, Romo's Homos would be a team worth watching. Their favorite play would be the old End Around.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 27, 2013, 06:14:57 AM Yeah they'll move the most popular and most valuable franchise in the NFL. :why_so_serious:
Keep dreaming you left coasters! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on September 27, 2013, 07:29:31 AM Yeah they'll move the most popular They are moving the Packers? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 27, 2013, 08:55:27 AM The West Hollywood Transexuals. The entire city of Dallas would have an aneurysm at the same time. Just call them the Compton Village People Cowboys. Have to keep the Cowboys on there to make sure their old fans know whose balls are in whose faces, the Compton part to associate it with black people and gangsta rap and the Village People for a little bit of teh ghey. Also, I was totally right about starting Kap instead of Bradford in fantasy football. You're welcome. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 27, 2013, 09:39:32 AM This thread is starting to get a bit.. :ye_gods:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 27, 2013, 11:08:04 AM The West Hollywood Transexuals. The entire city of Dallas would have an aneurysm at the same time. You have to be a little subtle. I'd go with the Hollywood Rage. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 27, 2013, 11:44:39 AM Also, I was totally right about starting Kap instead of Bradford in fantasy football. You're welcome. Yep that worked out well. Good job! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on September 27, 2013, 04:57:40 PM You can't fool me, nobody hated Joe Montana. I didn't hate him, but I didn't feel bad about my team murdering him either. Because I am a bad person. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 27, 2013, 06:50:32 PM You can't fool me, nobody hated Joe Montana. Wat? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on September 29, 2013, 09:14:48 AM THIS JUST IN: The NFL is mulling the possibility of expanding to 14 playoff teams and cutting preseason to 3 games. (https://twitter.com/ESPNNFL/status/384349978967035904)
I'm not sure if we need more playoff teams. I'll wait to hear from people who watch more sports than I do to know how this would impact things. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on September 29, 2013, 09:23:25 AM My initial reaction is No. There are already division 'champs' who enter the playoffs 8-8. Maybe they want to do it for teams who suck in the regular season but really perform in the playoffs (Giants).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 29, 2013, 09:24:27 AM The NFL does not need half the league to make the playoffs.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 29, 2013, 10:28:47 AM Seems inevitable. The NFL seems to want to expand everything now, sport be damned
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 29, 2013, 03:29:32 PM I don't understand what's going on today
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 29, 2013, 04:19:44 PM Giants and Pittsburgh are garbage teams this year. So are the Jags and Tampa Bay.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on September 29, 2013, 04:42:27 PM Maybe they want to do it for teams who suck in the regular season but really perform in the playoffs (Giants). Playoff football gets stupid ratings, that's the beginning and end of it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 29, 2013, 04:48:59 PM The problem is if they water it down, they'll burn their regular season ratings which are also top notch.
EDIT: Also Andy Reid looks good on a team that isn't in a city full of gigantic dickheads. :grin: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on September 29, 2013, 05:00:16 PM I don't see much of Seattle down here in the south, but they're real and they're spectacular. What a gut check against the leagues best defense. Why did the Texans call that bootleg play? Why does Schaub throw that? *boggle*
Buffalo beats the Ravens. Cleveland beats the Bengals. Did we enter an alternate universe? Grats on two young, scrappy teams. Possibly up-and-comers. Giants and Steelers lose again. No idea what NY's problem is but Pittsburgh has no one playing under 80. Giants may still climb out, but the Steelers are DOA. Titans are for real this season, but that also depends on the status of Locker. Guy gets hurt as much as Stafford. Titans have had no turnovers so far this season. Wow. Detroit beats a tough Bears team. Lions playing very good mostly. Suh finallly wakes up and gets two sacks, one leading to a TD. Lions mediocre defense wakes up and plays a complete game. The return of Reggie Bush finally, finally gives the Lions a threat other than Staffords arm. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on September 29, 2013, 05:10:42 PM No idea what NY's problem is Giants lines (offensive and defensive) which have long been the anchors of their team are both playing like shit this season. The O-line is just old and past their prime. I have no idea why the D-line can't get their shit together. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on September 29, 2013, 06:06:11 PM How bout dat fumble? :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on September 30, 2013, 06:27:43 AM Giants and Steelers lose again. No idea what NY's problem is but Pittsburgh has no one playing under 80. Giants may still climb out, but the Steelers are DOA. Other than their rookie RB who was injured the first 3 weeks and did well yesterday. It won't help them though. I agree that age is killing them. So we have 3 4-0 teams. Everyone is looking forward to Manning (a different one) beating Brady again. Who wouldn't root for the rumpled face Manning brothers against that pretty dick Brady? November 24 in Foxboro. The football press will have an aneurysm that week. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 30, 2013, 07:05:25 AM After tonight we'll have five 4 - 0 teams: Denver, KC, New England, Seattle and the winner of New Orleans/Miami.
In other news, apparently Cleveland sucks so hard they can't even tank their season right! :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 30, 2013, 07:26:46 AM Still not seeing much to make me believe Seattle and Denver aren't the scariest kids in all the playground.
Yet. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 30, 2013, 08:19:26 AM Still not seeing much to make me believe Seattle and Denver aren't the scariest kids in all the playground. Yet. That's because they are the scariest teams in the league. Right now, Denver is so far and away better than any other team INCLUDING Seattle that it's not a contest. The difference is not just Peyton Manning - the Broncos also have 3 of the better wideouts in the game and a monster TE to go along with a running game. The Seahawks wideouts are good but not on the level of those on the Broncos and of course Wilson is not on Manning's level either. As for that Houston/Seahawks game, that is Houston's problem in a nutshell. Their defense can't play 4 quarters and their offense while good isn't good enough to overcome their mistakes against good teams. That game should have been sewn up but instead of finishing, their defense lets Wilson run amok and Schaub throws one of the dumbest throws I've seen anyone make in a while. He had no business making that pass. Take the sack, punt the ball, put it on your defense. Houston is just a very weak team this year - they'll get in the playoffs because the AFC is a schizo division but they won't get very far. Parity seems to be going by the wayside this year. Teams are either really good or really fucking bad. Pittsburgh, the Giants, the Bucs and the Jags? Those guys are dogshit on a stick. Just utterly terrible and they should feel bad about making anyone watch their games. The next tier of teams are all inconsistent and could be terribad or world-beaters on their day. And then there's the Broncos and Seattle, who are playing on a whole other level to everyone else, even the other 4-0/3-0 teams. New England is one 4th down away from 3-1 and could easily be 2-2. I'm very interested in the Miami/New Orleans matchup tonight because I'm not entirely sure about either team. The Saints have an insane offense but is their defense good enough? Miami is so young and winning without Mike Wallace doing a damn thing at wideout. Tennessee is 3-1 but Locker looks to be out 4-8 weeks. Which means Fitzpatrick gets to add to this career INT totals. Based on the team stats, though, they are winning without putting up huge passing numbers so it may not be a big deal. Both the Bears and Lions are 3-1 but neither team has a defense worth a shit. Cutler throws 3 INT's and they lose in a shootout. I look forward to the Packers/Bears game because it could easily be a 50-49 affair. The AFC North is almost as much of a trainwreck as the NFC East this year. Baltimore, Cincy and Cleveland look like they may all challenge for the division as they are all inconsistent and capable of losing winnable games. Also, Atlanta has no excuse for being as bad as they are. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on September 30, 2013, 08:42:37 AM So I'm guessing the top 10 for this week looks something like:
1) Denver 2) Seattle 3) ??? 4) New England 5) 6) 7) Fuck it... 8) 9) 10) Everyone else? ... 31) New York Giants 32) Jacksonville Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 30, 2013, 08:44:24 AM I want to disagree with you with Denver over Seattle, and would have possibly done so last week. But with all the points they are putting up and the way Manning the Elder is play...I just can't do it. That is just too much firepower. On the other hand, we should probably temper things a bit and look at the teams Denver has played. Not exactly stellar defenses. It is funny to think that the Chiefs in November might be their first real test.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 30, 2013, 09:05:16 AM What's annoying about the Bucs is they have enough talent to be a pretty good team. But they have the shittiest coaching staff in the league and Freeman, even if he hadn't completely given up over the last two years, just never developed the accuracy to take the next step to becoming a good QB. He's basically Chad Henne now. Doesn't matter anyway since the Bucs will never go anywhere with that idiot Schiano coaching them.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 30, 2013, 09:18:48 AM Ok sure, the best team Denver has played has been Baltimore - and they aren't as good as their record would indicate. However, every single game Denver has played has been seemingly effortless. They haven't "broken a sweat" as it were. Whereas Seattle has struggled with teams they should stomp like Carolina and their offense is simply not the same on the road as it is at home. Denver has had 3 home games so that might also have something to do with it. Don't get me wrong, Seattle is really good but until a team emerges that is anything more than a speed bump, I can't say Denver isn't the best team in football.
Which means they'll get a bye for the first round of playoffs, Manning will be rusty in the second round and they'll get upset by somebody like Baltimore. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on September 30, 2013, 09:40:23 AM Ok sure, the best team Denver has played has been Baltimore - and they aren't as good as their record would indicate. However, every single game Denver has played has been seemingly effortless. They haven't "broken a sweat" as it were. Whereas Seattle has struggled with teams they should stomp like Carolina and their offense is simply not the same on the road as it is at home. Denver has had 3 home games so that might also have something to do with it. Don't get me wrong, Seattle is really good but until a team emerges that is anything more than a speed bump, I can't say Denver isn't the best team in football. Which means they'll get a bye for the first round of playoffs, Manning will be rusty in the second round and they'll get upset by somebody like Baltimore. :why_so_serious: Yeah, I basically agree for the most part, at least as far as Denver is concerned. I wouldn't be so certain about Seattle's opposition, though. Carolina appears to have a good defense (12 ppg so far, which is right at the top), and the Texans who are probably a better defense than their numbers are showing. They are supposed to be, anyway. And those were both away games. Regardless, I think that Denver probably beats Seattle right now on a neutral field. The real question, IMO, is whether or not Seattle's offense is going to show up. It really hasn't so far (you can't count Jacksonville). If they can get back some or all of the second half of the season mojo they had going last year, then the rest of the league is pretty much toast. I am not at all sure it is going to happen, though. Might have to see what happens when Percy Harvin gets back. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 30, 2013, 11:09:08 AM Both Seattle and San Fran are suffering offensively because they aren't using the pistol and read option enough. Both Kap and Wilson are good running QB's and better passers when the defense isn't sure whether to cover the run or the pass. In the games I've seen both teams play (2 games each), they have used the running QB so sparingly that it's almost not even a factor. Yesterday against Houston, Seattle's offense was flaccid until they let Wilson do his thing. I'm not sure if they are trying to protect them early in the season because of RGIII's issues as a running QB or what, but they really need to take the chains off those guys.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 30, 2013, 11:18:05 AM They are playing it smart with him so far. You don't take the chains off until week 8, and only if you have to. They don't really WANT them to be running QBs, they just want them to be able to escape from bad pocket plays.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on September 30, 2013, 12:53:05 PM Boy, Chip Kelly has been a predictable clusterfuck, hasn't he?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 30, 2013, 12:57:28 PM If by predictable you meant "they're going to take a while to get that system going properly and it is going to be entertaining to see it happen" then yes they've been predictable. Their defense was going to be bad with just about anyone at coach considering the personnel they have, and 2 of their 3 losses are to unbeaten teams. I don't think clusterfuck is really apt here.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 30, 2013, 01:19:40 PM They can continue to be a 'clusterfuck' all season long if it means McCoy continues to single-handedly keep my fantasy team afloat. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on September 30, 2013, 01:25:17 PM The NFC East is going to be an ugly thing again. Next weekend, the 2-2 Cowboys get Peyton. The 0-4 Giants are at home against the 1-3 Eagles. Redskins are on BYE. They have Denver in week 8. I find it interesting that each NFC East team plays the Broncos. Quirk of the calendar but it makes it all even.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on September 30, 2013, 01:29:54 PM It's not really a quirk. Every team from the NFC East plays every team from the AFC West this year. It rotates from year to year which divisions play each other.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 30, 2013, 01:45:30 PM The Broncos will put 55 on the Cowboys D. It's not pretty.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 30, 2013, 01:52:45 PM It's not really a quirk. Every team from the NFC East plays every team from the AFC West this year. It rotates from year to year which divisions play each other. Yes, and so far, the AFC West (which was one of the shittiest divisions last year) is 7-1 against the NFC East. The NFC East is simply a fucking dumpster fire. The Eagles aren't a clusterfuck but they aren't good. They can put up big offensive numbers but their defense cannot hold teams, especially when their offense is taking 25% less time to score as a normal offense. And we all know it's only a matter of time until Vick gets a lung punctured. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 30, 2013, 02:10:51 PM The Eagles couldn't get rid of Vick this year, so they are stuck with him until they can get something better to run that package.
Maybe they will, maybe they won't. I honestly don't care because that city is wretched and the fans there deserve to be miserable. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on September 30, 2013, 02:27:20 PM So on another topic, how about that Flacco contract? :why_so_serious:
I'm not sure how you throw 5 interceptions to a team with no secondary. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 30, 2013, 03:12:05 PM So on another topic, how about that Flacco contract? :why_so_serious: I'm not sure how you throw 5 interceptions to a team with no secondary. Easy, you give the ball to Joe Flacco. :why_so_serious: I've been saying this from the minute they traded Boldin - Flacco is going to have a terrible year. He's a very streaky, inconsistent QB. When he's on fire, he can be good but when he's off his game (such as when he's getting pressured or he has no one open to throw to), he is bad. Bad Joe Flacco showed up on Sunday. He's without his starting TE who was a good safety valve, he's without his main possession receiver (Boldin) who BTW was his leading receiver last year. Marlon Brown looks like he might be good but he's a rookie. Torrey Smith is a speed demon but still unpolished and inconsistent. Also, Ray Rice isn't 100% and though good, Pierce is no Ray Rice. I'm come to the conclusion that based on current form, there are 4 elite QB's in the league, the kind that can survive and win even when the talent around them is suspect - Peyton Manning, Brady, Brees and Rodgers. Everybody else needs help, some more than others (and some like Gabbert are beyond help). There's just no one else I can expect to be throwing to no name rookies and win week in and week out. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on September 30, 2013, 06:42:29 PM Miami doesn't look that bad if they stop making stupid decisions with the football.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on September 30, 2013, 08:06:44 PM This game feels like it should be closer than it is, but Miami seems a bit mistake prone.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on September 30, 2013, 08:21:24 PM Mike Sherman fist palming (caution shaky cam)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on September 30, 2013, 08:34:30 PM Tannehill looks to be a decent QB, or he will be once he works out the rookie mistakes and turnovers. Also, Daniel Thomas is not a good short yardage back.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 01, 2013, 03:24:24 AM Also, Daniel Thomas is not a good Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on October 01, 2013, 06:55:39 AM During the game last night Gruden made a good comment that seems so obvious to fans but seems to elude NFL coaches. Some teams are just going to score 30 or more points. Especially at home. When you are playing one of those teams (Saints) and you have 3rd and short, go for the 1st down and try for a TD. Field goals just are not going to cut it. I know that coaches like to just get some point on the board but it just seems chicken shit to me.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 01, 2013, 07:01:49 AM Coaches aren't aggressive in the NFL. You can't afford it usually because aggressive coaches get fired the second the tide turns.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on October 01, 2013, 07:09:44 AM During the game last night Gruden made a good comment that seems so obvious to fans but seems to elude NFL coaches. Some teams are just going to score 30 or more points. Especially at home. When you are playing one of those teams (Saints) and you have 3rd and short, go for the 1st down and try for a TD. Field goals just are not going to cut it. I know that coaches like to just get some point on the board but it just seems chicken shit to me. Also, Drunk Gruden is the best Gruden. (http://usatthebiglead.files.wordpress.com/2013/09/jon-gruden-doing-kettle-bells.gif?w=640) If you're NE and you're 4-0 with Miami looking vulnerable, what motivation do you have to rush back injury prone Amendola and Gronk? Wouldn't you just let them heal up extra? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 01, 2013, 07:11:14 AM Agreed, there's a strong incentive for them to be broadly risk-averse. It's a classic piece of game theory, the payoff matrix for actions such as going for 4th down conversions is so heavily slanted towards the costs of a negative result that Coaches are deterred from attempting them, even if it makes good sense statistically. Coaches are very easy to fire, and so the less they do to put themselves in jeopardy the better.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on October 01, 2013, 07:16:15 AM Agreed, there's a strong incentive for them to be broadly risk-averse. It's a classic piece of game theory, the payoff matrix for actions such as going for 4th down conversions is so heavily slanted towards the costs of a negative result that Coaches are deterred from attempting them, even if it makes good sense statistically. Coaches are very easy to fire, and so the less they do to put themselves in jeopardy the better. Bill Barnwell's Thank You For Not Coaching series on Grantland.com is a great read if you want to see great retrospective analysis on shitty coaching decisions. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 01, 2013, 07:28:11 AM If by predictable you meant "they're going to take a while to get that system going properly and it is going to be entertaining to see it happen" then yes they've been predictable. Their defense was going to be bad with just about anyone at coach considering the personnel they have, and 2 of their 3 losses are to unbeaten teams. I don't think clusterfuck is really apt here. So you're still in the camp that he's going to be a good NFL coach? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 01, 2013, 08:15:59 AM Updated Paelos Power Rankings:
1 - Denver 2 - Seattle 3 - Kansas City 4 - Patriots 5 - New Orleans 6 - Indy 7 - Tennessee 8 - Miami 9 - Detroit 10 - Chicago Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 01, 2013, 08:29:15 AM During the game last night Gruden made a good comment that seems so obvious to fans but seems to elude NFL coaches. Some teams are just going to score 30 or more points. Especially at home. When you are playing one of those teams (Saints) and you have 3rd and short, go for the 1st down and try for a TD. Field goals just are not going to cut it. I know that coaches like to just get some point on the board but it just seems chicken shit to me. This. That 3rd down call on the first drive pretty much epitomized why I hated Mike Sherman as Packers head coach and I see it continues here. He turned what was a high-flying offense with Brett Favre into a run first, play conservative and spend the 3rd quarter on 3 and outs until having to unchain the Favre in the 4th quarter to win a game you should have been able to dominate kind of team. He's HORRIBLY conservative even when he has good playmakers. On that play, he should have really gone for it, not thrown some weak ass play to the outside against a fast set of linebackers. Fuck it, put the ball in the hands of your franchise QB. That's going to bite them in the ass often this year. Not that they would have won if they got a TD there but it would have changed the dynamic of the game. At least it puts the pressure on New Orleans to score TD's. Of course, the press is now all about how New Orleans is a great team again and 4-0 as good as Denver and Seattle blah de blah. Fuck that. This New Orleans team is BETTER than it was, and it obviously has an improved defense. But it isn't close to the defense of Seattle and defense wins championships. And as I've said, neither team is as complete as Denver appears to be. Get New Orleans out of the dome and that team isn't nearly as good. Also, Miami is improved but they aren't a top 5 team either - which means New Orleans has beaten a weak Falcons team, a trainwreck of a Bucaneers team, and Arizona who appears to be an 8-8 team at best. Looking at all the 4-0 teams, they have mostly feasted on weak teams, and each one has played against 1-2 good teams at best. It's starting to look like the NCAA out there. :why_so_serious: And one more thing on Miami. I'm not sure what it is, but Mike Wallace looks to be a complete bust as a free agent signing. He is not even close to being on the same page with Tannehill - I'm not even sure they are reading the same book. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 01, 2013, 08:54:30 AM It's bizarre; they had week one issues, and then in week two he was light's out, and then since they're back to where they were.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on October 01, 2013, 10:06:52 AM I understand the incentives to be "conservative" for NFL coaches, but playing it safe and playing it smart do not have to be exclusive. The problem is that being down 14 pts limits your play options. The defense knows you have to be a bit more aggressive throwing. Miami has a good running game building. When you have that, you cannot go down two touchdowns because the clock won't you catch up. Brees, Peyton, even Stafford and others can come back from down 14 or 17 if they make mistakes. Tannehill cannot.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on October 01, 2013, 11:19:36 AM Of course, the press is now all about how New Orleans is a great team again and 4-0 as good as Denver and Seattle blah de blah. Fuck that. This New Orleans team is BETTER than it was, and it obviously has an improved defense. But it isn't close to the defense of Seattle and defense wins championships. http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/20/does-defense-really-win-championships/Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 01, 2013, 11:21:05 AM If by predictable you meant "they're going to take a while to get that system going properly and it is going to be entertaining to see it happen" then yes they've been predictable. Their defense was going to be bad with just about anyone at coach considering the personnel they have, and 2 of their 3 losses are to unbeaten teams. I don't think clusterfuck is really apt here. So you're still in the camp that he's going to be a good NFL coach? I think he has a chance to be. And he's certainly going to be an entertaining NFL coach. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 01, 2013, 12:06:49 PM If by predictable you meant "they're going to take a while to get that system going properly and it is going to be entertaining to see it happen" then yes they've been predictable. Their defense was going to be bad with just about anyone at coach considering the personnel they have, and 2 of their 3 losses are to unbeaten teams. I don't think clusterfuck is really apt here. So you're still in the camp that he's going to be a good NFL coach? I think he has a chance to be. And he's certainly going to be an entertaining NFL coach. I think he'll be out of the league in three years. I would say let's bet on it, but that's too long to keep up with a bet. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 01, 2013, 12:37:30 PM I also don't actually care enough to bet on it, I'm certainly not guaranteeing he will be successful. :-P
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 01, 2013, 12:50:41 PM Of course, the press is now all about how New Orleans is a great team again and 4-0 as good as Denver and Seattle blah de blah. Fuck that. This New Orleans team is BETTER than it was, and it obviously has an improved defense. But it isn't close to the defense of Seattle and defense wins championships. http://freakonomics.com/2012/01/20/does-defense-really-win-championships/Nobody can really play good defense anymore because the NFL doesn't let them. The rules have become so out of control we now have 50 point games regularly. That would have been impossible a decade ago. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 01, 2013, 01:15:22 PM 52 was a club record for the Broncos, so I'm not buying that argument even remotely.
Edit: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/years/NFL/scoring.htm While the average is higher the last few years, it still seems to not be nowhere near different enough to indicate a major scoring changes. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 01, 2013, 01:22:34 PM Ok 50 was hyperbole, but 40s are making regular appearances each week this season.
Also, I don't think overall scoring tells the whole story. You usually have one team laying the wood and another taking it up the tailpipe. I'd like to see an analysis on the margins of victory over the last 20 years. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 01, 2013, 01:26:10 PM If some teams aren't scoring... that would seem to indicate some favor FOR defenses.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on October 01, 2013, 01:32:47 PM If some teams aren't scoring... that would seem to indicate some favor FOR defenses. No, that would indicate they are terrible. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 01, 2013, 01:35:02 PM If some teams aren't scoring... that would seem to indicate some favor FOR defenses. I think it's more about one team has a QB, and the other team not as much. I mean really at this point, certain teams have figured out the league has changed, and they are going for broke on offense in building their franchise. Others just don't get it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 01, 2013, 02:45:38 PM Here is some more data, but I think it would still be nice to see it by year to see if there really is any sort of trend, but this seems to favor more of a "same as it ever was" side of things.
http://www.sportingcharts.com/articles/nfl/what-is-the-most-common-margin-of-victory-in-the-nfl.aspx Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 01, 2013, 04:26:00 PM That's actually interesting, and shows how a ton of games are being won by 14+
I assure you that Vegas doesn't set lines that high that often in NFL games. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 01, 2013, 04:38:42 PM Yeah, most line are between 0 and 10, from what I see.
On that note, the Broncos/Jags line (two weeks from now) is at 28, a record apparently. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 03, 2013, 12:00:42 PM Report: Tim Tebow Could Sign With Jaguars, Will Have ‘a Shot’ At Making Team (http://nesn.com/2013/10/report-tim-tebow-could-sign-with-jaguars-will-have-a-shot-at-making-team/)
(http://i3.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/242/631/382.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 03, 2013, 12:24:07 PM Oh please let that be true.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 03, 2013, 12:54:17 PM Oh that would be so lovely. I mean, they are already a sure thing to lose 16 fucking games, why not put some asses in those seats while doing it?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 03, 2013, 12:55:06 PM The release of Josh Freeman (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/271829/saga-over-buccaneers-releasing-josh-freeman) probably monkey-wrenches this a bit, though.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 03, 2013, 12:57:29 PM Freeman is actually better than his stats but the Bucs are dogshit this year and are apparently being coached by a vindictive cockmuncher. Freeman won't help the Jags anymore than Tebow would, though. That team is just fucking awful at every level.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 03, 2013, 01:05:18 PM Given they're so unsalvageable I would expect them to go with Tebow just for the few extra tickets he'll sell.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 03, 2013, 01:31:15 PM Given they're so unsalvageable I would expect them to go with Tebow just for the few extra tickets he'll sell. It's been the headscratcher of the offseason as to why they didn't specifically target that objective to start. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 03, 2013, 01:42:59 PM I think the reason Jacksonville has been so reluctant to acquire Tebow is because they know that once they have him, he'll be nearly impossible to get rid of because of his fan base there. He'd be like mold on that team.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 03, 2013, 01:48:55 PM Apparently the rumor is Freeman was fined by the Bucs for doing an unscheduled interview, because he didn't check with the coach first.
The situation down there is beyond crazy. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 03, 2013, 01:57:29 PM Schiano is one of those authoritarian total-control freak college coaches who thinks he can act the same way at the pro level. I knew he'd be a disaster as soon as those idiot Glazers hired him, and here we go. The sooner they send him packing, the better chance the next guy might have to salvage a decent team. The Bucs have some talented players, but that team will never go anywhere with that asshole as head coach.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 03, 2013, 02:06:17 PM He reminds me of when Petrino came to the Falcons. I've never seen a lockerroom that universally hated a coach until him, and now Schiano.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 03, 2013, 02:13:02 PM One can only hope Schiano sneaks out in the middle of the night soon, too.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 03, 2013, 06:38:23 PM Why am I watching this game? Still, hilarious to see Coach Marrone throw a red flag to challenge a penalty. (He was charged the time out anyway.)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 03, 2013, 07:30:57 PM Annnnnd Buffalo can't have nice things.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 03, 2013, 10:06:24 PM They still have wings!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on October 03, 2013, 10:08:32 PM Annnnnd Buffalo can't have nice things. Have you ever seen Buffalo? What makes you think it should have nice things? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on October 04, 2013, 07:56:46 AM Looks like Tebow still has a shot at the Jags, considering Freeman is now in line to get courted by the Browns.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 04, 2013, 08:30:19 AM Somebody needs to teach these new running QB's how to 1) actually slide tackle instead of folding oneself up like a taco and putting a giant "Spear Me into an MRI Machine" sign on their heads and 2) run out of bounds once you have the first down so that some aggressive DB doesn't come along and bend your kneecap like it's a fucking crazy straw. I mean seriously, both of those QB injuries could have been avoided. The Hoyer one was a terribly bad half-ass slide and if he'd executed the QB slide right, he'd have gotten an extra 15 yards instead of his upcoming stint on injured reserve. If his ACL isn't torn to shreds, I'll be amazed. Manuel might not be quite as bad off but there was absolutely no reason to have taken that hit. He could have gone out of bounds 3 yards earlier and been completely safe. Instead his undrafted rookie backup comes in and plays like you'd expect an undrafted rookie to play - horribly.
Not that Weedon was a great deal better, mind you. That boy holds onto the ball WAY WAY too long and his accuracy is spotty. He doesn't seem to have any quickness with his decisions whereas Hoyer is "drop back, scan THROW or run" and he is clear. Weedon took a number of unnecessary sacks simply from not throwing the ball away or not running soon enough. McGahee is not going to be the kind of back you can rely on to carry poor QB play, not with this team. If Weedon is their QB for the rest of the season, they are not going to contend. Just based on the limited snaps I saw of Hoyer, they could have contended with him. How this kid didn't win the starting job in camp, I don't know. He just seems to have such excellent quickness about his decisions that Weedon doesn't. And fuck you Weedon for not being able to get the ball to Cameron more. As for Manuel, he's pretty good if he learns the lessons I mentioned above. He could use some better blocking but he's got a pretty good weapon in Robert Woods (not to mention Stevie Johnson when he's healthy). Buffalo's defense was better than I expected. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 04, 2013, 08:50:25 AM Matt Flynn is now #3 on the raiders depth chart; guy can't catch a break can he?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 04, 2013, 08:57:03 AM Motherfucker got sacked 7 times this weekend. He's probably better off not playing this year and trying to latch on to a team with a better O line next season. Plus, I'm sure Pryor will get hurt again and someone will have to start.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 04, 2013, 10:35:53 AM It always amazes me how QBs just do not know how to slide feet first. Did none of these cats play little league? Fuck it, I learned in Tee ball. Hoyer was a dumbass on the play. He was looking respectable up until then. Completely unnecessary injury - if you break yourself on a play...? I mean really. I'll just bask in the notion that the Browns are in 1st in the AFC north because that shit won't last and certainly won't be common, so as a fan, I'll take it right now.
And yes, he did shred his ACL and is now on the IR for the rest of the year. So much for that career. http://nfl.si.com/2013/10/04/browns-brian-hoyer-torn-acl-out-for-season/ Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 04, 2013, 11:04:49 AM So much for the Browns' resurgence. Weedon is just not good enough to get that team anywhere.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 04, 2013, 11:06:58 AM I want QBs to stop doing that altogether. Either throw it away, or take the sack. The scrambling drives me nuts in this league lately.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on October 04, 2013, 11:10:48 AM I want QBs to stop doing that altogether. Either throw it away, or take the sack. The scrambling drives me nuts in this league lately. Not sure if serious... :uhrr: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 04, 2013, 11:17:30 AM Definitely sure it won't happen. We're seeing more QB's running, not less. I just want the college coaches and the pro coaches to start teaching these chucklefucks how to avoid a fucking hit. Show them the last few years of Donovan McNabb's career or Daunte Culpepper's injury if they need illustration about the dangers of dumbassery.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 04, 2013, 11:18:47 AM No, I mean it. QBs are trying to run for first downs, and run to avoid taking hits, yet all the NFL protections and rules only exist when you are in the pocket. There is literally a zone from the upper thigh to your armpits that you can hit a QB in the pocket. Anything else, and it's a flag and a fine. Move from that pocket? And it's free game except for a helmet leading shot.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 04, 2013, 01:01:57 PM Can we blame RGIII for this? Or was the there always a trend towards mobile QB threats?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 04, 2013, 01:02:33 PM Can we blame RGIII for this? Or was the there always a trend towards mobile QB threats? I blame Elway... always have, and always will. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 04, 2013, 01:08:53 PM Is it just me or does it seem like there are more midseason trades this year than usual?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ruvaldt on October 04, 2013, 01:12:41 PM Can we blame RGIII for this? Or was the there always a trend towards mobile QB threats? I would blame Vick before anyone else. He was the first quarterback to have 1,000 yards rushing. McNair and McNabb are notable for having higher than average rushing numbers recently, but Vick was really the one that broke the mold more than anyone, I think. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 04, 2013, 01:26:00 PM It really went over the top with Vick, yes.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 04, 2013, 01:26:05 PM Tarkenton imo.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 04, 2013, 01:28:51 PM He would run, but you'd never see much more than 300ish yards a season. Vick was what caused this modern era of running QB onslaught we've seen in my mind. He rushed for almost 800 yards in his second season.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 04, 2013, 01:42:42 PM He had to run. He sure as fuck couldn't throw accurately or read defenses.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on October 04, 2013, 02:03:31 PM Or the PETA website, for that matter.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on October 04, 2013, 02:21:59 PM Tarkenton imo. He would run, but you'd never see much more than 300ish yards a season. Vick was what caused this modern era of running QB onslaught we've seen in my mind. He rushed for almost 800 yards in his second season. Tarkenton ran around a lot but most of that was behind the line of scrimmage. Staubach I would say was actually the better runner (and scrambler) but he didn't need to run as much since his position players were so good. Randall Cunningham to me was the prototype of today's running QB. Steve Young could've been that person as well but he chose not to run as much as he could've.Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 05, 2013, 08:30:44 AM I seem to remember Montana being fairly good at scrambling/running, but I my memory of that era of football is pretty fuzzy.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on October 05, 2013, 09:13:06 AM Randall Cunningham was really the first QB that his running ability scared defensive coaches as much or more than his throwing ability. He would look at running the ball as a way to get yardage in and of itself, not as a way to extend the play to give him a chance to find an open receiver (which the "scrambling" quarterbacks like Elway were doing).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 06, 2013, 10:26:15 AM First quarters aren't even over and we have the play of the week.
http://www.gifdsports.com/2013/10/titans-kicked-ball-fumble-on-punt.html Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 06, 2013, 11:08:21 AM O rly?
http://www.diehardsport.com/2013/10/06/indianapolis-colts-block-seattle-field-goal-return-td/ (http://www.diehardsport.com/2013/10/06/indianapolis-colts-block-seattle-field-goal-return-td/) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 06, 2013, 11:09:17 AM I stand on the KC/TEN play. It's so ridiculous.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 06, 2013, 11:14:21 AM It was a smart play by the KC dude to push the blocker into the path of the bouncing ball. That blocked field goal landing right on the Colts guy, that was ridiculous.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 06, 2013, 11:39:20 AM That was just a heads up play by the Colts player to snatch the ball. The Chiefs were just applying good coverage, flukish as hell for it to bounce off the foot. Great heads up play by the Chiefs afterwards, but in general Chiefs DST has been phenomenal this season.
http://screengrabber.deadspin.com/more-like-the-new-york-fumble-giants-1441758421 :facepalm: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on October 06, 2013, 01:21:55 PM Eli is just trying to outdo Geno for most interceptions in New York.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on October 06, 2013, 02:55:52 PM Peyton could've strolled that in.
:heart: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 06, 2013, 04:07:23 PM Every Denver game is sort of proving my point about how ridiculous offense is getting in the NFL. This one just happens to be on both sides. It's like a college game out there.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on October 06, 2013, 04:43:05 PM Peyton could've strolled that in. :heart: He did though. * Edit: Doubting the church of Peyton. Hah! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 06, 2013, 05:51:07 PM Oh Tony Romo, don't you ever change. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on October 06, 2013, 06:42:57 PM Can't really blame him for the loss, though.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: jgsugden on October 06, 2013, 09:49:06 PM I like how Wilson is utilized as a running QB. He goes down well before any hit he sees coming, and his movement is enough to force the defenses to devote resources to try to contain him. I don't think he is the best of these young mobile QBs, but he does seem to be the one that makes use of his running ability to the most benefit with the least risk. However, if I were starting a franchise today, the QB I'd want is the least mobile one in this new generation of mobile QBs: Luck. Mobile, but that isn't his real strength.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MediumHigh on October 06, 2013, 11:17:07 PM Funny me at the bar seeing the cowboys score on their first drive. I shout 50 point game and leave before the first quarter ends when it's 17 to 14. I look at a cowboy fan and say "hey that kicked field goal is going to cost you the game." :drill:
I've always liked Tony Romo and despite being a redskin fan, if I could root for the cowboys without throwing up it'll be because of him. Sure he is inconsistent but so is Eli and he has 2 rings and Tony could throw circles around him with half the talent at the other end of the ball. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2013, 07:45:59 AM Can't really blame him for the loss, though. Why not? He tossed a pick at the worst possible time when you absolutely need him to not turn the ball over. He did what franchise QB's aren't supposed to do - he threw a pick deep in his own territory with the game tied and no timeouts left. He should have had better blocking but he also should not have thrown that ball. That game was insane. I may have to change my mind about Dez Bryant being a true #1 - he looked the part yesterday and his stats this year hold up. Now if only the Cowboys could run the ball, they might have a winning record. Romo was incredible for 58 minutes. Peyton was Peyton. I'm more surprised that the Denver D gave up almost 50 points. New Orleans is for real. Chicago... not so much. The Saints defense is better than I thought but the Bears are not as good as their record indicates. The only reason that game was even close was one 3-play drive that had Alshon Jeffrey open deep (though he was open most of the game). Otherwise the Bears shit the bed on offense. Their defense is really not good which is something I completely don't get. This is almost the same crew as last year's D but they can't seem to stop anybody. If New Orleans had any sort of running game, this game would have been over in the 2nd quarter. The fact that the Saints had to settle for 2 FG's on their first two drives because they couldn't make short yardage situations with the running game was all that kept it from being a rout defensively. Mike Vick's hamstring - :why_so_serious: Eli's 3 turnovers - :uhrr: As for Houston - fuck, this team is seriously way worse than they have any right to be. Their defense can't stop anybody right now. San Fran just ran over them. Kap couldn't find anyone open most of the night and yet the Texans STILL couldn't keep them out of the endzone. And I don't know what the fuck is up with Schaub but whatever it is, defenses are just pouncing on his mistakes when he makes them. Maybe they've figured him out. Offensively, you can put their collapse this season entirely on him. Foster/Tate are running well, they have a second weapon besides Johnson in Deandre Hopkins but Schaub is just not getting shit done, period. Fans calling for Yates to start though? I'm not sure what they think Yates is going to do better other than not throw picks. Of course, that may be enough. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on October 07, 2013, 08:06:35 AM As for Houston - fuck, this team is seriously way worse than they have any right to be. You're dead on there. The Madden way to put it is they don't have a winning attitude. I blame Kubiak. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 07, 2013, 08:07:33 AM Why not? He tossed a pick at the worst possible time when you absolutely need him to not turn the ball over. He did what franchise QB's aren't supposed to do - he threw a pick deep in his own territory with the game tied and no timeouts left. He should have had better blocking but he also should not have thrown that ball. That game was insane. I may have to change my mind about Dez Bryant being a true #1 - he looked the part yesterday and his stats this year hold up. Now if only the Cowboys could run the ball, they might have a winning record. Romo was incredible for 58 minutes. Peyton was Peyton. I'm more surprised that the Denver D gave up almost 50 points. DeMarco Murray has been running the ball pretty well, the Cowboys just go away from the run for long stretches of time because their playcaller is terrible. I think the worst part of the Romo interception is there's Murray wide open in the foreground waiting for a dump-off pass that would have gained them close to 10 yards. There was plenty of time left on the clock and the Cowboys had all three of their timeouts at the time iirc. It's like Romo wanted to remind everyone he was Romo on that play. :oh_i_see: Here's my week 5 power rankings: 1) Broncos 2-32) Who cares? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2013, 08:14:42 AM Here's my week 5 power rankings: 1) Broncos 2-32) Who cares? That really is true. I mean, New Orleans is good and KC seems to be decent as well. But San Fran didn't look that convincing in their win, Green Bay should have destroyed a Lions team at home without Calvin Johnson and they only got what, 1 TD? Seattle lost to Indy who apparently have something approaching a defense now. The Cowboys might have to go up in the rankings based on their performance but NFC East, dumpster fire, etc. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on October 07, 2013, 08:30:48 AM Why not? Because at some point the Dal defense needs to step up and make a stop to keep him out of the situation, or his O-line needs to block better? Because Trevalan made a great play while Escobar did fuck-all for effort to go and get the ball? I believe Witten would have at least made an effort for the ball in that situation. Or maybe, because Romo had a 140 passer rating and 90qbr with 500+ yards, going toe to toe with a living legend, and it really isn't his fault they lost by 3 to a much better team? N.O is for real, absolutely. Rob Ryan has patched up that defense from worst in the league to a top 5 in one season, and that is crazy. As for Chi, they are exactly what their record indicates - above a .500 team. It's still the same shit though - a receiving RB tears them up. It breaks down tampa-2 defenses if the WRs can block. Det and N.O have WRs that can do just that and the RBs that are good enough to make use of those blocks. Agree with Vick, Eli, and Hou though. Here's my week 5 power rankings: 1) Broncos 2-32) Who cares? ^Truth. I think Hilton put on a clinic of how to be a WR against Sea yesterday, who stays at the top of the "Who cares?" team for the time being. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on October 07, 2013, 08:39:59 AM Here's my week 5 power rankings: 1) Broncos 2-32) Who cares? Maybe 1) Broncos 2-4) NO 5) KC Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2013, 08:42:59 AM I think KC is going to get exposed soon and it probably won't be against a great team. Don't get me wrong, KC is good but I think they are a piece or two away from really contending. Of course, in this NFL, that means they could make the AFC championship game because at least 60% of the teams are utter crap.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 07, 2013, 08:54:52 AM I actually think the Broncos are going to get all they can handle when the travel to Indy. If they win that game as convincingly? Then it's just the Chiefs standing in the way of 16-0.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 07, 2013, 09:31:13 AM Anyone should see that Indy is going to be a tough and highly emotional game. But, seriously, don't leave out the Redskins. Shanny's returns to Mile High. That being said, it IS the Redskins, but I don't really want the Broncos to sleep on them. Also playing IN Foxboro is always risky.
Sunday really exposed just how paper thin our defense is. While Dallas got away with a lot of holding, so did the Broncos. Two weeks until we get Von back, thank god. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 07, 2013, 10:47:03 AM Blaming the QB for a loss when the team scores 48 is so stupid that any columnist that tries to pin that on Romo should be fired for gross incompetence, interception at the end of the game or not. That game goes squarely on the defense.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 07, 2013, 10:49:55 AM Blaming the QB for a loss when the team scores 48 is so stupid that any columnist that tries to pin that on Romo should be fired for gross incompetence, interception at the end of the game or not. That game goes squarely on the defense. Yup. Romo played out of his mind in that game. All the throwing him under the boss is ridiculous. It was one INT, on a play they ran several times. Trevathan read the play and jumped. Both defenses played terribly in general. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on October 07, 2013, 10:53:24 AM QB's, like the leader of any team, always get the blame. When you're the on-field general, you take the heat. It's what you're paid for.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 07, 2013, 10:58:45 AM And that doesn't have anything to do with fans saying stupid shit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 07, 2013, 11:00:16 AM The one that really got me was the ESPN Dallas guy, but then again the ESPN Dallas writers are all terrible.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 07, 2013, 11:01:44 AM I don't blame Romo for that game at all. Both defenses should be totally ashamed in that fiasco.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2013, 11:06:21 AM So you're telling me that he is blameless for throwing that INT at the worst possible fucking time? How the fuck is that possible? If Peyton's INT was the last pass he threw during the game, and the opposing offense scored on a short field because of it, it'd be Peyton's fault too. Should the defense not have let in 51 points? Of course - but this is also a team that has scored 35+ points EVERY GAME THIS SEASON. That doesn't excuse the defense but it shouldn't excuse the QB when he makes a dumb pass in his own half that gets picked and turns into the game winning field goal. He played out of his mind for 58 minutes but the game is 60 minutes long. You're the QB - you get paid the insane bucks to lead a team. That means you get the blame when it's your pass that gets intercepted. And when you just got a huge contract to be the face of the franchise, and this is almost a by-the-book retelling of the entirety of your career as a starting QB, you get the blame.
It sucks. I'm sure he can console himself with his hot wife and piles of fat fucking cash. The same goes for Schaub. His picks were the reason that team lost. Their defense played like shit against the run game and deserve a good share of the blame, but Schaub's picks? As bad as the offense played, that one pick-6 he threw was enough to ensure they didn't win the game. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 07, 2013, 11:10:32 AM It's because you can't narrow down the game to that one instant. If you are going to blame him there you also have to credit him with the play that allowed them to be in it at all. They did not lose that game because of Tony Romo; they were only IN that game because of Tony Romo.
With Schaub you're actually right. There is a vast, vast gulf between those two performances. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on October 07, 2013, 11:15:53 AM Can't really blame him for the loss, though. Why not?Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2013, 11:18:19 AM He played out of his mind for 58 minutes but the game is 60 minutes long. As I said, he played great and that team would be dead without him. But he's still got to finish the game. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on October 07, 2013, 11:20:36 AM Doesn't that pretty much sum up Romo's career. They lost because of his mistake, but they wouldn't have been close enough for the mistake to matter without him. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 07, 2013, 11:28:08 AM Yeah, Romo sucks. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2013, 11:33:52 AM Doesn't that pretty much sum up Romo's career. They lost because of his mistake, but they wouldn't have been close enough for the mistake to matter without him. :why_so_serious: Abso-freaking-lutely. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 07, 2013, 11:38:30 AM Who knew, throwing a one-hitter when the guy on the other side tosses a perfect game makes you a choke artist.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 07, 2013, 11:39:13 AM He played out of his mind for 58 minutes but the game is 60 minutes long. As I said, he played great and that team would be dead without him. But he's still got to finish the game. That's ridiculous. The game should have been over already, but somehow it's on Romo because he threw that pick late? The defense gave up 9-13 3rd down conversions and 5 first downs on penalties. It's a fucking train wreck. Romo brought them back from 35-20 to having a TD lead with about 7 minutes left in the 4th quarter, and the defense STILL couldn't do jack shit. I will blast Romo for bad decisions, but that pick wasn't one. It was an incredible diving catch made by a DB that 9 times out of 10, he drops. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 07, 2013, 11:45:24 AM Like I mentioned earlier, they had ran that same play several times during the day. Trevathan (said DB) recognized it, read the play and jumped on that ball. It was a solid pass. That was not on Romo. At all.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on October 07, 2013, 11:45:48 AM Who knew, throwing a one-hitter when the guy on the other side tosses a perfect game makes you a choke artist. When you're making $108 million on your contract you sometimes have to take blame that you don't deserve. It's a rough life, but I'm sure Tony can gut it out. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 07, 2013, 11:47:29 AM We're saying the blame is dumb, not that Romo needs protection.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 07, 2013, 11:48:39 AM Who knew, throwing a one-hitter when the guy on the other side tosses a perfect game makes you a choke artist. When you're making $108 million on your contract you sometimes have to take blame that you don't deserve. It's a rough life, but I'm sure Tony can gut it out. It isn't about Tony's feelings - I hate the Cowboys, and he falls right under that with everyone else - it is about my desire to read commentary by professional sportswriters who actually understand what is going on in front of their eyes. Haemish is just a convenient proxy. :awesome_for_real: EDIT: On the other hand, maybe Jerry Jones believes all this stuff about him being terrible now and will get rid of him, thus making the Cowboys worse and me happier. I need to ponder this. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2013, 11:53:27 AM I predict the Cowboys will not win another Super Bowl with Jerry Jones alive OR Tony Romo as starting QB. Bold prediction, I know. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 07, 2013, 12:16:00 PM You can remove the Tony Romo part.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on October 07, 2013, 12:19:40 PM We're saying the blame is dumb, not that Romo needs protection. I get it. I agree. People get stupid when it comes to sports. You want to be really shocked... go to a little league game and listen to the parents in the stands. It's fucked up. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on October 07, 2013, 12:20:52 PM Like I mentioned earlier, they had ran that same play several times during the day. Trevathan (said DB) recognized it, read the play and jumped on that ball. It was a solid pass. That was not on Romo. At all. (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-RAimZiS42io/UlHyeXgoRCI/AAAAAAAABxQ/F-xKq25mnEw/s1600/LOLROMO.gif) That's basically the only play Denver D made that whole game, just happened at the BEST possible moment. I mean, Jesus, look at this shit: (http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-fuPwarzukkc/UlHOVRE8aaI/AAAAAAAABu4/Cf33bussGQg/s400/tonyt.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 07, 2013, 12:20:59 PM Hell, go ump a YMCA tee ball game. That was an experience that wasn't worth the $40.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 07, 2013, 12:58:27 PM See what I mean about Murray on that interception?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2013, 01:15:44 PM Murray was wide open with room to run and Romo missed the checkdown. Escobar was not open - the linebacker was almost in step with him. Bryant wasn't open on the outside. Romo saw a guy coming up the middle and got happy feet.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on October 07, 2013, 01:42:04 PM Yes the defenses were awful, but the loss is on Romo's shoulders. He made a bad decision at a critical time. Wars are lost that way and the winner writes history.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 07, 2013, 01:48:48 PM That's simply madness. By that logic, it wouldn't be his fault for the loss if he didn't bring the team back from the brink of a 2 TD deficit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 07, 2013, 01:50:00 PM Yes the defenses were awful, but the loss is on Romo's shoulders. He made a bad decision at a critical time. Wars are lost that way and the winner writes history. When it comes to football, butt-hurt local reporters for the losing team write the history. The winners are just writing erotic self-insertion fanfic about themselves and Peyton Manning. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2013, 01:51:07 PM When the game is tied, your offense gets the ball with 2 minutes left, who is it that people expect to win the ball game? The quarterback. That's why there's a stat for "game-winning drives in the 4th quarter" for QB's and not for defenses. When you fail to get it done because you throw a bad pick, it's the QB's fault. If he throws 3 incompletions, it's not nearly so bad as throwing a pick.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 07, 2013, 01:51:57 PM Not when the game is TIED AT 48 POINTS IN THE NFL.
That's completely uncharted waters. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2013, 01:53:09 PM 48 points or 14 points, with 2 minutes and your team in possession, it's the QB's game to win or lose because it might as well be 0-0. Whoever scores next will probably win.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 07, 2013, 01:55:15 PM Is this the part where you pull the mask off and reveal that ghost has hijacked your account?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 07, 2013, 01:56:56 PM This is absurd. Put him on a team with a functional defense, a functional line, or a functional GM, and he's got a ring.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on October 07, 2013, 01:57:16 PM It's all about heart, Ingmar. Heart and moxie.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 07, 2013, 02:03:37 PM The winners are just writing erotic self-insertion fanfic about themselves and Peyton Manning. :why_so_serious: LOOK I HAVE A LOT OF TIME ON MY HANDS RIGHT NOW. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on October 07, 2013, 02:06:16 PM Who knew, throwing a one-hitter when the guy on the other side tosses a perfect game makes you a choke artist. Well, you know how it is. A pitcher's win/loss record is the mostest important! Meanwhile, the Giants are fucking awful but I find it endlessly entertaining that they're still only what? Two games back? Plus two SB wins (one being the most delicious win I will ever experience as a fan) within the past six years makes it hard to be too sulky. I just hope Coughlin doesn't give himself a stroke. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on October 07, 2013, 02:09:26 PM Is this the part where you pull the mask off and reveal that ghost has hijacked your account? :heart: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 07, 2013, 02:11:04 PM Is this the part where you pull the mask off and reveal that ghost has hijacked your account? Hey. Maybe I'm a sock puppet... :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 07, 2013, 02:23:15 PM BTW, Trevathan is the same dude who did the following in Week 1:
(http://assets.sbnation.com/assets/3168737/sillaydonkay.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on October 07, 2013, 02:29:22 PM Did you catch his interview afterwards? They couldn't get the camera off him fast enough.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 07, 2013, 02:34:27 PM Why so?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on October 07, 2013, 02:37:24 PM He's not very eloquent, to put it mildly. Not all these guys are.
But he made a big play, so, the camera gets put in front of him. He was happy at least. edit: Saying "kids" makes me sound and feel very old. :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 07, 2013, 02:44:35 PM Yeah, he didn't have a reputation of being brilliant when he was at Kentucky. Good player though. Both he and Woodyard are from UK.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 07, 2013, 02:53:32 PM Wait until you hear Teddy Bridgewater give interviews. :oh_i_see:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 07, 2013, 02:56:13 PM Well.....Kentucky is the more academically rigorous of the two major state universities. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2013, 03:18:38 PM This is absurd. Put him on a team with a functional defense, a functional line, or a functional GM, and he's got a ring. I could say the same about half the fucking QB's in the league. That shouldn't excuse a bad throw. Hell, put Matt Ryan on the Cowboys and he probably makes the same dumbass throws. There are 4 QB's in the league that could take the Cowboys to the Super Bowl - Rodgers, Manning, Brady and Brees. Tony Romo is the new Mark Bulger. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 07, 2013, 03:20:59 PM If we're talking about game-losing interceptions shouldn't we be anoiting him the next Brett Favre?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 07, 2013, 03:52:51 PM Yeah, he didn't have a reputation of being brilliant when he was at Kentucky. Good player though. Both he and Woodyard are from UK. Wood is really making a case for my next Jersey to be his. Everything about that cat thrills me. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2013, 07:53:13 PM If we're talking about game-losing interceptions shouldn't we be anoiting him the next Brett Favre? Not until he wins a Super Bowl. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 08, 2013, 06:30:38 AM Updated Paelos Power Rankings Week 5:
1 - Denver 2 - New Orleans 3 - KC 4 - Indy 5 - Seattle 6 - New England 7 - San Francisco 8 - Green Bay 9 - Tennessee 10 - J-E-T-S JETS JETS JETS Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 08, 2013, 06:34:28 AM Atlanta is ass. The fact they believe they actually have a shot at the super bowl is laughable, but they are delusional fans who are still fixated on last year. Their line on both sides is a joke, their defense is populated by rookies, and they got pass rushed to death in the 2nd half by the Saints (who aren't going to be known for that at all). Now, I will agree with you that Atlanta's offensive line is SHITTY. If the Saints are able to dial up those kinds of blitzes against a better line, I'll believe in it, but I'm not there yet. I will say that a lot of those sacks and pressures looked like good schemes that weren't picked up by Ryan or Atlanta's line so Ryan may have something to do with their success. However, I was actually impressed with Atlanta's secondary. They seemed able to cover better than I would have expected. I don't think Atlanta is Super Bowl caliber - I honestly don't think anybody can beat San Fran in the playoffs this year, including Green Bay. BUT, they aren't as bad as you make them out to be. Do you believe Atlanta is ass now? The city is having to be kept away from sharp objects today. It's pretty hilarious. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on October 08, 2013, 07:21:24 AM Updated Paelos Power Rankings Week 5: 1 - Denver 2 - New Orleans 3 - KC 4 - Indy 5 - Seattle 6 - New England 7 - San Francisco 8 - Green Bay 9 - Tennessee 10 - J-E-T-S JETS JETS JETS I....I can't argue with those. Good job. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 08, 2013, 07:44:42 AM Quote Retweeted Jamie Lissette (@jamielissette): The Washington Redskins are to change their name, due to negative associations. From now on, they will be known as the "Maryland Redskins" :drill: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 08, 2013, 07:50:05 AM Still not sold on the Jets. I'd take Miami over them TBH. Geno is too streaky for my comfort. Hell, I'd probably go for Detroit over either of those two right now.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 08, 2013, 08:25:43 AM Atlanta is ass. The fact they believe they actually have a shot at the super bowl is laughable, but they are delusional fans who are still fixated on last year. Their line on both sides is a joke, their defense is populated by rookies, and they got pass rushed to death in the 2nd half by the Saints (who aren't going to be known for that at all). Now, I will agree with you that Atlanta's offensive line is SHITTY. If the Saints are able to dial up those kinds of blitzes against a better line, I'll believe in it, but I'm not there yet. I will say that a lot of those sacks and pressures looked like good schemes that weren't picked up by Ryan or Atlanta's line so Ryan may have something to do with their success. However, I was actually impressed with Atlanta's secondary. They seemed able to cover better than I would have expected. I don't think Atlanta is Super Bowl caliber - I honestly don't think anybody can beat San Fran in the playoffs this year, including Green Bay. BUT, they aren't as bad as you make them out to be. Do you believe Atlanta is ass now? The city is having to be kept away from sharp objects today. It's pretty hilarious. :why_so_serious: Yep. Completely. Their season is done even in a weak NFC. You can't beat the goddamn Jets? You are dead to me. OTOH, the Jets maybe aren't so bad if you squint hard? I mean, they are 3-2, but the 3 wins are all against shitty teams (Atlanta, Tampa Bay and Buffalo) and the losses are against the good teams they've played (New England, Tennessee). Looking at their schedule, they have 2 more games against good teams (NE, New Orleans), 5 games against maybe good teams (2 Miami, Cleveland, Baltimore and Cincy) and the rest are winnable games even for this dumptruck of shit. Their most important games may be the 2 against Miami. I can't necessarily argue with your Power rankings though. I might slip Detroit up to 10 instead of the Jets because their offense is just that much better in an offensive-focused league or any one of Miami/Cincy/Baltimore because I think each of those teams has better weapons at some skill positions (compared to the none at the offensive skill positions for the Jets). The NFC is a goddamn mess right now. There might well be 2 8-8 teams in the playoffs this year (one from the East and another from amongst Chicago, Detroit, Philly and Arizona). That's how thin the margins in that division are. Meanwhile, the AFC is going to have potentially 9 teams vying for wild card playoff spots (Tenn, Houston, Baltimore, Cincy, Cleveland, KC, Miami, Jets, Chargers). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 08, 2013, 10:35:08 AM Wow, Julio Jones might be out for the season. I think New Orleans can start to rest players for the playoffs now. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on October 08, 2013, 10:44:31 AM Wow, Julio Jones might be out for the season. I think New Orleans can start to rest players for the playoffs now. :awesome_for_real: Fuck he has been bread and butter for me. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 08, 2013, 10:52:56 AM Wow, Julio Jones might be out for the season. I think New Orleans can start to rest players for the playoffs now. :awesome_for_real: Tampa or the Falcons, who finishes last? Discuss. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on October 08, 2013, 10:53:37 AM Matt Ryan is my starter in my "big money" league ($125). Luckily I also drafted a certain Indy QB, so I might be ok...especially since we run through the Super Bowl and it looks like ATL is SOL.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 08, 2013, 10:57:31 AM Wow, Julio Jones might be out for the season. I think New Orleans can start to rest players for the playoffs now. :awesome_for_real: Tampa or the Falcons, who finishes last? Discuss. :why_so_serious: Well, Atlanta has the better QB but at this point Tampa has better talent at WR, RB and on defense. But Tampa has Schiano so they finish last just because of that. :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 08, 2013, 11:12:20 AM If they don't have Jones, it's over. They may not win another game this season. Roddy White has been hampered by injuries and took another last night it seems, and Stephen Jackson has been a non-factor for the same reason. They got NOTHING after that. Can't block, can't run, no one to throw to. Going to be a long season in the A-T-L.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 08, 2013, 11:25:35 AM But hey, at least they got a deal done for a new stadium because Super Bowl or Bust AMIRITE? :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on October 08, 2013, 11:31:00 AM But hey, at least they got a deal done for a new stadium because Super Bowl or Bust AMIRITE? :why_so_serious: They certainly kept their promise! :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on October 08, 2013, 11:35:53 AM Updated Paelos Power Rankings Week 5: I would rank them:1 - Denver 2 - New Orleans 3 - KC 4 - Indy 5 - Seattle 6 - New England 7 - San Francisco 8 - Green Bay 9 - Tennessee 10 - J-E-T-S JETS JETS JETS 1 - Denver 2 - New Orleans 3 - Indy 4 - KC 5 - Seattle 6 - San Francisco 7 - New England 8 - Green Bay 9 - Miami 10 - Cincinnati Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on October 08, 2013, 11:36:19 AM Tony Gonzalez is gonna cut someone if he doesn't get traded to a contender.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 08, 2013, 11:36:55 AM COME HOME TONY
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on October 08, 2013, 11:38:31 AM COME HOME TONY http://profootballmock.com/tony-gonzalez-demands-trade-to-kansas-city-chiefs/ That would be awesome. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on October 08, 2013, 11:41:05 AM COME HOME TONY That would work. Davis can switch to WR and Gonzalez can stay as TE.Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 08, 2013, 11:49:39 AM I won't leave off the Jets when I get a chance Trippy. They are my new favorite dysfunctional bunch of misfits.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on October 08, 2013, 11:54:49 AM Sure I understand. For the bottom 2 or 3 spots there are a bunch of "ok" teams right now that you can choose from.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 08, 2013, 12:14:37 PM You know, Atlanta could always make a trade for Josh Gordon. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 08, 2013, 12:21:18 PM Sure I understand. For the bottom 2 or 3 spots there are a bunch of "ok" teams right now that you can choose from. The bottom 5 of Paelos's "list" would qualify for that. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 08, 2013, 12:24:24 PM I didn't even see this story until now but the Raiders released Matt Flynn. :oh_i_see:
So who needs a QB that has now lost the starting job to TWO running QB's on two separate teams despite having a starting QB contract? Tampa? Jacksonville? Buffalo? Tennessee? There's lot of injuries/issues at QB in the lower ranked teams but does anyone want to take the flier on him? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on October 08, 2013, 12:33:26 PM I was going to comment on Paelos' list... until I realized that my pick performance proves that I know nothing about the NFL this year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 08, 2013, 12:40:35 PM I just can't believe that Matt Flynn is that bad.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 08, 2013, 12:49:10 PM I just can't believe that Matt Flynn is that bad. Marginal quarterbacks on great teams always look shiny. He is not bad for a backup who never really has to play to win a game, but otherwise... Can't really knock him for the Seattle thing though. NO ONE excepted Wilson to do much given his size. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 08, 2013, 12:56:22 PM He still has to be better than what the Bills are trotting out.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 08, 2013, 02:09:27 PM Alex Smith has rushed for more yards than Colin Kaepernick this season so far.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 08, 2013, 02:12:48 PM I'm not sure why we're not doing any designed plays for him this year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on October 08, 2013, 02:15:49 PM No point in tipping your hand now if you can win without them.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 08, 2013, 02:39:52 PM No point in tipping your hand now if you can win without them. Only problem is they haven't been. Kap needs to be doing designed runs if for no other reason than they have one functioning wideout and a gimpy Vernon Davis to catch the ball. He's not a good enough passer yet to make that work without some trickeration, which is what the pistol is built to do. Yet they seem almost spitefully unwilling to use it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 08, 2013, 02:42:26 PM Kap needs to run because MY FUCKING FANTASY TEAM IS IN SHAMBLES, AAAAAAARGH
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on October 08, 2013, 03:03:30 PM No point in tipping your hand now if you can win without them. Only problem is they haven't been. Kap needs to be doing designed runs if for no other reason than they have one functioning wideout and a gimpy Vernon Davis to catch the ball. He's not a good enough passer yet to make that work without some trickeration, which is what the pistol is built to do. Yet they seem almost spitefully unwilling to use it. Seattle has been doing the same thing with Wilson. Now that he is a 'franchise QB', he is too valuable to risk. All but a tiny fraction of Wilson's rushing yards this year are from scrambles, not designed plays. I think he has been loathe to call his own number on the read option as well. Not sure what is causing that. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 08, 2013, 03:12:13 PM Maybe seeing a bunch of other QBs having their knees exploded by defenses who are hell-bent on hitting low is a strong disincentive.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 08, 2013, 03:55:58 PM Jax should think about Flynn.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on October 09, 2013, 07:34:45 AM Jax should think about me - or a shit flinging gorilla.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 09, 2013, 08:04:57 AM I'm surprised they haven't picked up Vinny Testaverde. :oh_i_see:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 10, 2013, 09:33:45 PM So when exactly does Coughlin get canned?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on October 10, 2013, 09:43:25 PM (http://i2.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/117/008/soon_honey_beer_bottle.jpg)
I'm pretty sure they'll give him 8 games. Then regardless of the record, he's gone. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on October 11, 2013, 05:12:16 AM Well that was fun. Even though it was against my team, it was nice seeing Brandon Jacobs have a game like that, always liked the guy. Too bad it was against third string tackles. Cutler continues to play well and predictably will continue to be unnoticed by the rest of the world until the next time he scowls at someone.
Bears best find a way to shore up the line with Melton out, or its going to be a long season - can't intercept passes when they are running it down your throat. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on October 11, 2013, 05:39:13 AM I don't really see what they have to gain by firing Coughlin right away.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on October 11, 2013, 07:09:17 AM Firing Elli or Coughlin won't solve shit. Just let the season be the disaster it is destined to be and try and get a decent RB next year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 11, 2013, 07:33:32 AM Every time the mob starts calling for Coughlin's head, the Giants seem to make the playoffs/super bowl. Just sayin'.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 11, 2013, 08:07:24 AM Every time the mob starts calling for Coughlin's head, the Giants seem to make the playoffs/super bowl. Just sayin'. Not this year. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 11, 2013, 09:10:13 AM Every time the mob starts calling for Coughlin's head, the Giants seem to make the playoffs/super bowl. Just sayin'. Not this year. Year ain't over... and it would not surprise me if the team that wins the division goes 8-8. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 11, 2013, 09:25:18 AM Coming down from 0-6 to make the playoffs would pretty much take a goddamn miracle, even in that dumpster fire of a division they call the NFC East. Yes, 8-8 might win that division - hell, 7-9 might do that. I'm not sure I see the Giants winning 3 games, much less the 7 or 8 out of 10 it would require. They have no running game. Eli is throwing picks left and right because he only has Victor Cruz to throw to and has no offensive line. Their defense can't stop anybody.
I don't blame Coughlin. The GM gave him shit to work with and left the O line to get too old and injured. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on October 11, 2013, 09:33:22 AM If the Giants win the rest of their remaining 4 division games (Redskins x2) and the majority (3) their non-division games (Vikings, Raiders, Packers, Chargers, Seahawks), that would put them at 8-8. The bright spot is that they have a long rest between last night and Sunday night against a beatable(?) Vikings. All that really has to happen is a stop to the turnovers.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 11, 2013, 09:44:45 AM That's a pretty incredible tall order. They finish with 3-4 wins.
In other news, thoughts go out To Adrian Peterson as his son is in critical condition after being severly beaten. His son is 2. (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/10/11/report-petersons-son-beaten-in-critical-condition/) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on October 11, 2013, 10:52:13 AM I think that story has been corrected.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 11, 2013, 11:13:28 AM In what way?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 11, 2013, 11:20:26 AM Probably worth noting he doesn't have custody of the kid. The mom's boyfriend is the guy who was arrested.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 11, 2013, 11:29:16 AM Probably worth noting he doesn't have custody of the kid. The mom's boyfriend is the guy who was arrested. What is worth noting about the custody thing? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on October 11, 2013, 11:30:54 AM That he wasn't the one beating his child and why he had to travel to see him.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 11, 2013, 11:32:28 AM Just makes it clear that it wasn't like, a guy he hired to take care of the kid or his friend or something, some of the articles were a little unclear on that sort of thing at first.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 11, 2013, 11:36:14 AM The story I linked at least didn't make that inference, so I just wanted to clarify the reasoning for pointing that out.
But, yeah, it's his son from a former GF and the boyfriend of said GF. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 11, 2013, 12:14:18 PM I hope the kid makes it, and I hope the BF rots in prison.
AP just needs to take a leave of absence and get up there to be with his son. Nobody will judge him for that. They WILL judge him if he plays. There are reports coming out saying that he's going to play, and I really hope they are not true. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 11, 2013, 12:23:56 PM I hope the kid makes it, and I hope the BF rots in prison. AP just needs to take a leave of absence and get up there to be with his son. Nobody will judge him for that. They WILL judge him if he plays. There are reports coming out saying that he's going to play, and I really hope they are not true. Why? There's nothing he can do at this point, and often people cope with grief by putting time in with whatever makes them "tick". Most players seem to play after a great loss or tragic moment and end up playing out of their mind. Case in point, Favre after his father died. Via RotoWorld (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/272699/adrian-peterson-will-play-without-a-doubt) Quote "I'm able to release a lot of stress through sports," Peterson told reporter Sean Jensen. "I really appreciate all the support from fans and the Vikings. I ask y'all respect my privacy." Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 11, 2013, 12:28:58 PM The kid is alive and in the hospital, not deceased yet. It won't play well in the public eye at all.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 11, 2013, 12:39:37 PM Since it is a home game, Sioux Falls is only a few hours away so he'd be away probably less than a day all told, and he can't really do anything directly for the kid. Were it me I think I'd play, but hard to know really.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 11, 2013, 12:45:18 PM I just think it raises questions about the already negative stereotype we have of NFL players having kids with several women they never see and don't care about.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 11, 2013, 12:47:40 PM That is incredibly dumb. We all have to vent our pressures/stresses in our own way. Anyone who complains about it (and I've seen no ill word about it yet), deserves a slap.
AP doesn't fit that model anyway. The dude is 28 and has two or three kids. Anyone that paints him in that light I would probably deserves another slap for profiling him in that way. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on October 11, 2013, 12:50:47 PM I wouldn't want to try to stop a completely enraged AP. He will make Charles Jefferson look like a toddler throwing a tantrum.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 11, 2013, 01:13:01 PM That is incredibly dumb. We all have to vent our pressures/stresses in our own way. Anyone who complains about it (and I've seen no ill word about it yet), deserves a slap. AP doesn't fit that model anyway. The dude is 28 and has two or three kids. Anyone that paints him in that light I would probably deserves another slap for profiling him in that way. Granted I went off the comments of the first posting story, which was TMZ, but it came up several times. It also already came up on the local sports talk show here in town. It's out there. Right or wrong, these guys get judged on everything. I thought it would be better for him mentally and PR-wise if he didn't play. But, these guys don't think that way. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 11, 2013, 01:21:50 PM here in town. It's out there. Right or wrong, these guys get judged on everything. I thought it would be better for him mentally and PR-wise if he didn't play. But, these guys don't think that way. Yes, I know well that it happens. I'm saying it's STUPID. But, who are you to dictate what is better for him mentally in dealing with grief? Everyone deals with it in their own way. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 11, 2013, 01:29:27 PM The problem I have with that argument of "Who are you" is that it doesn't work with public figures. They rely on the "who are you's" to provide their fame and salary. As such, they are subject to us not liking them for decisions they make that we deem inappropriate in our own moral code.
I don't think he's necessarily wrong for not being there. I think it comes off wrong and/or uncaring. I also put myself more in the kid's shoes, and I would hope my father wouldn't choose work over being with me as I possibly lay dying. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 11, 2013, 02:12:18 PM So remember the criticism I continue to level at Tony Romo for being a choker?
Statistics bear it out (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9788821/schefter-blitz-matt-flynn-cashes-cba-loophole). Quote In the first 12 minutes of the fourth quarter in each game since 2010, Romo has thrown 26 touchdown passes and only six interceptions and completed 67 percent of his passes, all while posting a total QBR of 80. But when the games have had fewer than three minutes left in the fourth quarter or been in overtime, Romo has thrown two touchdown passes and four interceptions and completed 59 percent of his passes, all while posting a total QBR of 44. Not a fan of Schefter but those are compelling numbers. That story also tells how Matt Flynn has already made more money this season than the top 5 QB's that were drafted last year and became starters for their teams - and that's with only 1 start. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 11, 2013, 02:15:37 PM Gonna need to see how he stacks up against everyone else in that exact same 4th quarter window to even begin to draw meaningful conclusions about it.
Also note he has plenty of 4th quarter comeback wins: http://www.pro-football-reference.com/play-index/comeback.cgi?player=RomoTo00 Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 11, 2013, 02:21:55 PM He's had 18 4th quarter comebacks. Andrew Luck has had 9 in just 21 games. Peyton Manning has had 39. Romo's numbers put him tied with Sonny Jurgenson and Jon Kitna. Illustrious company. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 11, 2013, 02:26:30 PM The problem I have with that argument of "Who are you" is that it doesn't work with public figures. They rely on the "who are you's" to provide their fame and salary. As such, they are subject to us not liking them for decisions they make that we deem inappropriate in our own moral code. His fame/success bears nothing on my point. Absolutely nothing. I don't think he's necessarily wrong for not being there. I think it comes off wrong and/or uncaring. I also put myself more in the kid's shoes, and I would hope my father wouldn't choose work over being with me as I possibly lay dying. Who the fuck cares at the end of the day how it comes across? The dude's always been pretty private. the guy obviously cares that his kid is in distress, but there is jack and shit he can do about it. If he deals with the grief by gioing out and chalking about 200 yards and 3 TDs... who are we to say that's wrong? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 11, 2013, 02:32:09 PM Apparently AP's son has passed away (https://twitter.com/chipscoggins/status/388773676348239872)
This is really really sad. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 11, 2013, 02:37:23 PM Awful. Just awful.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 11, 2013, 02:38:01 PM Apparently AP's son has passed away (https://twitter.com/chipscoggins/status/388773676348239872) This is really really sad. Well, now that fucker can stay in prison. Ugh. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 11, 2013, 03:02:19 PM Normally I'm not pro-death penalty but beating a 2 year old to death would be a case I would apply it to.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on October 11, 2013, 03:06:39 PM Just lock the fucker in the Vikings locker room with the team for 5 minutes. Have a haz-mat team on standby to mop up whatever is left.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on October 11, 2013, 03:37:14 PM Normally I'm not pro-death penalty but beating a 2 year old to death would be a case I would apply it to. Yeah, this is one of the cases that it's hard to argue against it for sure. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on October 11, 2013, 04:33:18 PM That's fucking horrible.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 11, 2013, 10:28:51 PM Hope the prison he gets sent to is full of those kinds of cons who really hate fuckers that do shit to kids. What a sad waste.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on October 11, 2013, 11:00:39 PM So apparently he still is planning on playing. The local news here is saying that he didn't know the kid was his until a few months ago.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on October 11, 2013, 11:17:28 PM Aaaand my stomach drops by reading that story, holy shit. Hope the kid gets better soon.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 11, 2013, 11:34:53 PM So apparently he still is planning on playing. The local news here is saying that he didn't know the kid was his until a few months ago. Jesus?! Really?! Ugh. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on October 13, 2013, 10:02:43 AM Lets see how I do on Sundays games:
Lions over Browns Broncos over Jags KC over Oak Car over Min GB over Ravens Pitt over Jets Bengals over Bills Eagles over TB Texans over STL Seattle over Titans Saints over NE Niners over AZ Boys over Wash Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 13, 2013, 10:09:12 AM Who said Nick Foles can't run? :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 13, 2013, 01:10:33 PM um... Texans?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 13, 2013, 01:26:26 PM Kubiak had a good run in Houston... but given the fans reactions and that start... he's going to be looking for a job soon.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on October 13, 2013, 03:03:13 PM edit: image seems to have gone haywire. Ohh well.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 13, 2013, 04:14:44 PM The NFL is completely bananas this year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 13, 2013, 04:44:20 PM The ending of that NE/NO game was pretty ridiculous.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 13, 2013, 04:46:36 PM The ending of that NE/NO game was pretty ridiculous. Tom Brady sorta pulled a rabbit out of his ass on that one. The Saints offense can only blame themselves. I love it when that conservative bullshit bites teams in the ass. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 13, 2013, 04:47:17 PM That was one of the craziest drives I have ever seen. It's stuff like that that shows why Brady is considered elite; amazing bit off football right there.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 13, 2013, 04:48:46 PM Side note, Boston fans are still terrible. Half that stadium was gone and Troy called them out on it during the broadcast. Thing of beauty.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 13, 2013, 05:14:04 PM Not as bad as the Texans fans, who cheered as Schaub limped off the field. The pick-six that Yates promptly threw was karma biting them in the ass.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 13, 2013, 05:23:14 PM Not as bad as the Texans fans, who cheered as Schaub limped off the field. The pick-six that Yates promptly threw was karma biting them in the ass. Yeah, considering Schaub had a good game prior to the injury. Classless fans. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 14, 2013, 09:00:41 AM After hearing about Schaub getting a cheer for being injured, FUCK THE TEXANS this year. JUST FUCK THEM IN THE EARHOLE. That is classless shit. Enjoy being perennial almost-made-its fucktards. Your team is much more terrible than it has any right to be with the talent that is on that team and after that bit of douchery, I hope the entire team just quits on this season.
The Packers beat the Ravens by the skin of their teeth, and lost two of their starting wideouts in the process. No word on how long either Cobb or Jones will be out either, though indications are that the Cobb injury isn't as serious as first thought. I cringed hard when I saw that helmet to the knee live - my first thought was WELP, there goes the ACL. I can't believe they only dressed 4 wideouts for that game. The 4th was Boykin and he SUCKED IT HARD. Hope if either of those guys is out for any length of time they get some street free agents who can run a route or catch a damn ball. The good news was how well the defense did without Clay Matthews. AJ Hawk got three sacks, and there were 2 others. The coverage remains a problem though, specifically at safety. Jeron McMillan is just not good in coverage. That game wasn't even close except for about 4 deep passes with coverage that got blown HARD. That New Orleans/New England game was just fucking nuts. New Orleans has no one to blame but themselves for losing it. You don't give Tom Brady a chance to make a 4th quarter drive. Washington/Dallas happened about like I expected. Having seen RGIII in two games this year, I really think they have rushed him back WAY too soon. Would it really hurt them to have Kirk Cousins start a few games and let RG3 heal? He's getting better but he's obviously not even close to being the runner he was before. Sit him for a few games, let Cousins have a shot. They already aren't going to win this year even in the weakass NFC East. Putting your fragile franchise QB out there is just asking for him to take another shot to his knee. Cousins looked good and can lead this team as well while the kid rests. I mean, if Griffin IS the franchise's future, why risk him in a year when you are hamstrung by a huge salary cap penalty? If Cousins sucks, you can put RGIII back in and if Cousins does well, he's going to be a HUGE trade commodity for next year's draft, on a year when you aren't hindered by the salary cap. The only reason I can see them putting that kid out there is to sell tickets which is really stupid, short-sighted thinking. So only Denver and KC are left undefeated. Who saw that coming? Also, Minnesota is dogshit and will likely be coached by someone else next year. Weedon's final INT in that game with the Lions yesterday was SO LOLWORTHY. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 14, 2013, 02:05:59 PM The ending of that NE/NO game was pretty ridiculous. Tom Brady sorta pulled a rabbit out of his ass on that one. The Saints offense can only blame themselves. I love it when that conservative bullshit bites teams in the ass. Someone pulled something out of somewhere, certainly. (http://cdn2.sbnation.com/assets/3384441/SaintsPatriotsHolding.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Fordel on October 14, 2013, 02:07:27 PM What is the GIF showing me?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 14, 2013, 02:09:55 PM Maybe a hold/facemask?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on October 14, 2013, 02:11:15 PM (http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/193427u3l1jrogif/original.gif)
My fav from this weekend. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on October 14, 2013, 02:22:30 PM What is the GIF showing me? One of the safeties not helping the corner on the winning TD throw.Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on October 14, 2013, 02:24:24 PM Lets see how I do on Sundays games: Lions over Browns Broncos over Jags KC over Oak Car over Min GB over Ravens Pitt over Jets Bengals over Bills Eagles over TB Texans over STL Seattle over Titans Saints over NE Niners over AZ Boys over Wash Looks like I went 11-2 with the Texans and Saints losing. Damn I'm good, someone put a camera on me! Texans need to fire the coach with all the talent they have on the field. Oh and fuck those fans. I really thought they had the AFC South but they are chump bitches. With the Titans having a good team lead by a horrific QB, looks like the Colts, in week 6, have the South. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 14, 2013, 02:26:27 PM There is absolutely a hold on that play.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on October 14, 2013, 02:29:16 PM Ah, yeah.
Edit: no flag no foul :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 14, 2013, 03:13:54 PM The blatant hold was the thing I was pointing out. Note that there is a ref with pretty much that same view who held onto his flag for some reason.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 14, 2013, 03:25:13 PM The blatant hold was the thing I was pointing out. Note that there is a ref with pretty much that same view who held onto his flag for some reason. Last play, no way. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on October 14, 2013, 04:56:46 PM You could basically call a hold on every offensive snap. See the Tyree helmet catch in the Superbowl for example. (not that I'm bitter or anything)
Also watch the secondary play on the Saints go ahead touchdown, how the fuck does the Pats corner not bat that pass down????? Bad enough giving Brady one chance, let alone three chances at a comeback drive. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 15, 2013, 05:45:38 AM That was clearly a hold that should have been called. They always say that the refs "shouldn't change the game", but by not calling that it changed the game.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 15, 2013, 08:04:05 AM So the Chargers can run the ball, and the Colts can't stop the run to save their lives. Who knew?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2013, 08:11:22 AM Paelos Power Rankings Week 6:
1 - Denver 2 - Seattle 3 - KC 4 - NE 5 - New Orleans 6 - SF 7 - Indy 8 - Detroit 9 - Chicago 10 - Dallas Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 15, 2013, 08:47:38 AM I might quibble about the order a bit, but the only one on there I would have a problem with is Dallas. I'd put Cincy or San Diego on there before or at about the same level as Dallas.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2013, 08:53:14 AM I might quibble about the order a bit, but the only one on there I would have a problem with is Dallas. I'd put Cincy or San Diego on there before or at about the same level as Dallas. I gave Dallas the nod for their point differential against better competition. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 15, 2013, 08:56:19 AM Realistically, Dallas, Cincinnati and San Diego all suck. No need to argue about shite teams.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 15, 2013, 09:39:14 AM Even with Indy's issues yesterday, I think I am preparing myself of the Broncos first loss, even with Miller coming back.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2013, 10:07:57 AM Even with Indy's issues yesterday, I think I am preparing myself of the Broncos first loss, even with Miller coming back. That's patently ridiculous. Indy can't stop the run, and Moreno is at the top of his game right now. Inside the red zone, Indy is doomed against Denver's attack. SD isn't exactly a top defense, and they put a halt to whatever Indy wanted to do. They looked sloppy and were getting pressured constantly. Denver can bring the house and afford to gamble. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on October 15, 2013, 10:29:25 AM I might quibble about the order a bit, but the only one on there I would have a problem with is Dallas. I'd put Cincy or San Diego on there before or at about the same level as Dallas. Here's what I want to know... where the fuck did you get your insight on picking games this year? I know a couple of guys that handicap football and both are having a terrible time picking winners. You've been on fire. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 15, 2013, 10:31:10 AM I might quibble about the order a bit, but the only one on there I would have a problem with is Dallas. I'd put Cincy or San Diego on there before or at about the same level as Dallas. I gave Dallas the nod for their point differential against better competition. Despite all the injuries, I'd probably still put Green Bay in above Detroit and Chicago, and kick Dallas out. I'd also put KC under NE and NO, but otherwise I agree. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 15, 2013, 10:48:51 AM Even with Indy's issues yesterday, I think I am preparing myself of the Broncos first loss, even with Miller coming back. That's patently ridiculous. Indy can't stop the run, and Moreno is at the top of his game right now. Inside the red zone, Indy is doomed against Denver's attack. SD isn't exactly a top defense, and they put a halt to whatever Indy wanted to do. They looked sloppy and were getting pressured constantly. Denver can bring the house and afford to gamble. The last two weeks have shown very distinct issues with the Broncos banged up offensive line and plenty of issues with the zone scheme we've been using in the secondary. We're going to have to move multiple people along that O-Line at the same time and hope that it works. If we can score early and keep the momentum going, we'll be fine... struggle like we did with tempo and scheme like we did against Jacksonville? We'll be in major trouble. Indy's D is a lot tougher than Jax's, and JAX put Manning in the dirt and hurried him several times. If Indy can play with a similar scheme, we'll struggle. My commentary is more about the Broncos than Indy. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2013, 11:16:46 AM They were overlooking the Jags, no matter what they said.
You don't think Peyton will have the entire team ready for the return game to Indy? If they can't overcome that emotional hurdle, they will lose in the playoffs when the heat is on. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 15, 2013, 11:23:31 AM How did I not notice you didn't have Green Bay in the top 10? You are crazy for that alone. Green Bay is top to bottom a better team than Dallas in just about every possible way, and they are better than both Detroit and Chicago. Yes, they are missing two wideouts for potentially weeks (Cobb may be 6-8 weeks, Jones might be back this weekend) but I don't think that hurts them enough to drop them out of the top 10.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on October 15, 2013, 11:24:32 AM Also Von is back and apparently put on 20 pounds of muscle and worked with a pass rush specialist the whole time he was suspended (http://www.denverpost.com/broncos/ci_24303437/lot-people-said-it-went-by-fast-it).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 15, 2013, 11:27:15 AM Har. He put on 20 pounds of muscle in the time he was suspended for violating the league's drub policy? :awesome_for_real:
Quote For clarity, Miller's troubles had nothing to do with performance-enhancing drugs. ....yet. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 15, 2013, 11:29:50 AM They were overlooking the Jags, no matter what they said. You don't think Peyton will have the entire team ready for the return game to Indy? If they can't overcome that emotional hurdle, they will lose in the playoffs when the heat is on. I actually did not have anything negative to say about Manning and the skill positions, did I? Quite the opposite. Read what I wrote again, it is all about the Offensive line issues and secondary issues, which are all incredibly valid. I also call bullshit on the overlooking the Jags thing. You can't talk about Peyton's and Broncos work ethic on one hand and then say they didn't prepare for this game. It also throws the Jags accomplishments under the bus. Go back and watch the game again. The broncos were out of sync with the pressure on Peyton all day. If Indy can muster that (and I think they can), we're in for a long day. Which is why I said that we have to score. This is all going to be on Peyton's shoulders. Har. He put on 20 pounds of muscle in the time he was suspended for violating the league's drub policy? :awesome_for_real: Quote For clarity, Miller's troubles had nothing to do with performance-enhancing drugs. ....yet. The dude has put on tons of muscle since college without failing a test for PEDs, and given he's tested all the time now, I don't think he's going to be relying too much on PEDs. I will NOT BE SURPRISED if he does fail, of course. But I just really hope he doesn't as the next strike is a year loss. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2013, 11:47:26 AM How did I not notice you didn't have Green Bay in the top 10? You are crazy for that alone. Green Bay is top to bottom a better team than Dallas in just about every possible way, and they are better than both Detroit and Chicago. Yes, they are missing two wideouts for potentially weeks (Cobb may be 6-8 weeks, Jones might be back this weekend) but I don't think that hurts them enough to drop them out of the top 10. I disagree. Those injuries are gigantic. Besides Nelson, there's no more important receiver to the Packers than Cobb. Mostly because he's one of the two go-to threats to get first downs. If Jones misses the Cleveland game, they are in big trouble there. I've also seen nothing out of them that says this is their division to command (while I have seen that out of the Cowboys). They beat a Detroit team without Calvin Johnson, and they haven't faced Chicago at all. I want to see how they handle a good defensive team in Cleveland this weekend. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2013, 11:53:42 AM Read what I wrote again, it is all about the Offensive line issues and secondary issues, which are all incredibly valid. I also call bullshit on the overlooking the Jags thing. You can't talk about Peyton's and Broncos work ethic on one hand and then say they didn't prepare for this game. It also throws the Jags accomplishments under the bus. The Denver line has allowed the fewest sacks and fewest QB hits of anyone in the NFL. The team overlooked the Jags, whether or not Peyton did. I don't mind throwing the Jags under the bus, since the rest of the NFL will do that routinely this year on their way to a 1-15 record. The secondary is a problem in yards, but they are ball-hawking (4th in interceptions). They are going for picks because they know the offense will score. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 15, 2013, 12:05:44 PM Read what I wrote again, it is all about the Offensive line issues and secondary issues, which are all incredibly valid. I also call bullshit on the overlooking the Jags thing. You can't talk about Peyton's and Broncos work ethic on one hand and then say they didn't prepare for this game. It also throws the Jags accomplishments under the bus. The Denver line has allowed the fewest sacks and fewest QB hits of anyone in the NFL. The team overlooked the Jags, whether or not Peyton did. I don't mind throwing the Jags under the bus, since the rest of the NFL will do that routinely this year on their way to a 1-15 record. The secondary is a problem in yards, but they are ball-hawking (4th in interceptions). They are going for picks because they know the offense will score. The "ball hawking" all comes late game when we are playing from ahead and the opposing teams HAVE to throw it up. It's all clutch stuff, which is GOOD TO HAVE, don't get me wrong. It's also why we have slide to 32 in pass defense. The Denver line that allowed the fewest sacks came from before the injuries starting to stack up on that line. Look again at the game, if you can. The Jags game was the first game where the injuries showed itself to be a concern. It was the first game where a team has gotten as much pressure as the Jags did, and Peyton had a shitty day (2 INTS, plenty of incomplete passes, lots of over/under throws), which by most standards was still a great day. I think I've stated that I have faith in this team, but I think there is a distinct roadmap for an Indy upset. You're acting like I'm expecting them to get blowout. I could see a tight game, where the final score is within 4 points. If Indy gets the pressure, causes some turnovers and some defensive stops, they can pull it out. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on October 15, 2013, 12:07:13 PM How did I not notice you didn't have Green Bay in the top 10? And here I thought you were just not feeling well since you didn't comment on that :why_so_serious: I do agree they are still top 10, as long as Rodgers has 1 legitimate target while Lacy is healthy that will be the case imo. The issue is that 6-10 is a crapshoot still. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 15, 2013, 12:13:17 PM Once you get out of the top 5 teams they all suck. Then it's just a debate about which team's uniform you like better.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 15, 2013, 12:13:51 PM The issue is that 6-10 is a crapshoot still. I think 2-9 is a crapshoot too. :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 15, 2013, 12:19:29 PM My rankings haven't changed. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2013, 12:30:34 PM I think I've stated that I have faith in this team, but I think there is a distinct roadmap for an Indy upset. You're acting like I'm expecting them to get blowout. I could see a tight game, where the final score is within 4 points. If Indy gets the pressure, causes some turnovers and some defensive stops, they can pull it out. I think you're seeing things that aren't there. The line is Denver -7 on the road in an emotional game. That's a gigantic number given the circumstances. If Denver is remotely balanced in their attack, and they protect the football, they aren't in line for an upset in my mind. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 15, 2013, 12:31:42 PM Denver is going to paste them.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 15, 2013, 01:26:35 PM I think I've stated that I have faith in this team, but I think there is a distinct roadmap for an Indy upset. You're acting like I'm expecting them to get blowout. I could see a tight game, where the final score is within 4 points. If Indy gets the pressure, causes some turnovers and some defensive stops, they can pull it out. I think you're seeing things that aren't there. The line is Denver -7 on the road in an emotional game. That's a gigantic number given the circumstances. If Denver is remotely balanced in their attack, and they protect the football, they aren't in line for an upset in my mind. I don't give a shit about betting lines when it comes to talking about this sort of thing. I just don't. Especially with the craziness that is this season. This Broncos squad is great, but there are some concerns with our defense because of the last two weeks, and our offensive line was almost a joke for the first half. We may not have given up many sacks, but sacks are fucking overrated. Pressure is where it's at and the O Line gave up a lot of pressure and Manning ate dirt on more than one occasion on Sunday. Adjustments came late and it was better in the second half, but the injuries are mounting up and there are cracks there. And I'm not going to throw Indy under a bus. They're a tough team. Again, I'm not expecting us to get blown out and the season to tank. We'll still win the division and... go on to lose in the second round of the playoffs. :D I gave the roadmap for a Broncos victory; I'm just not ready to chalk up a W for this one. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 15, 2013, 01:45:04 PM I might quibble about the order a bit, but the only one on there I would have a problem with is Dallas. I'd put Cincy or San Diego on there before or at about the same level as Dallas. Here's what I want to know... where the fuck did you get your insight on picking games this year? I know a couple of guys that handicap football and both are having a terrible time picking winners. You've been on fire. No idea. I do tend to watch at least 2 games each Sunday, but I'm starting to wonder if I shouldn't find a good sports bookie and make a little money out of whatever it is. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on October 15, 2013, 01:56:48 PM You're not betting against the spreads making those picks. If you can't beat the spreads they don't pay you shit.
That said since you're having a good year you could try finding a site that would let you parlay all moneylines and then bet a 3-team parlay (try to get to 1:1 or better) and a big lottery-ticket style one every week. If you want to have even more fun with less money you can try open parlays, where you get to add more teams to it each week. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 15, 2013, 01:59:34 PM Are there any legal football betting web sites out there? I'm hardly a gambler so I know jack and shit about any of that.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on October 15, 2013, 02:05:51 PM The Wire Act (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Wire_Act) prohibits the transfer of sports betting information via telephone, and has been extended to the Internet. So no, not really, unless MS specifically has legalized it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 15, 2013, 02:10:18 PM I don't give a shit about betting lines when it comes to talking about this sort of thing. I just don't. Especially with the craziness that is this season. Teams with a 7 point of more spread this season have gone 22-5 straight up. Only two teams with a 7 point or more spread have lost since Week 3, and that's the hapless Falcons and Texans. I've talked to several Indy people. They think if the good Indy shows up, they can keep it close, but they are depressed right now after last night. My overall point is this. Only a Denver fan would see warnings where you're seeing them. I'm not saying it's a pushover in Indy at all, but OMG THE LINE AND THE SECONDARY. I'm rolling my eyes at that when you are currently undefeated and number 1 in O line rating. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 15, 2013, 02:10:21 PM Amazingly enough, that has not happened. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 15, 2013, 02:37:53 PM I don't give a shit about betting lines when it comes to talking about this sort of thing. I just don't. Especially with the craziness that is this season. Teams with a 7 point of more spread this season have gone 22-5 straight up. Only two teams with a 7 point or more spread have lost since Week 3, and that's the hapless Falcons and Texans. I've talked to several Indy people. They think if the good Indy shows up, they can keep it close, but they are depressed right now after last night. My overall point is this. Only a Denver fan would see warnings where you're seeing them. I'm not saying it's a pushover in Indy at all, but OMG THE LINE AND THE SECONDARY. I'm rolling my eyes at that when you are currently undefeated and number 1 in O line rating. You're again misrepresenting my concerns as more dire than they are. I've been discussing the question marks that ARE there, even if we still win. I've said that it could be a close game, and that I see a good opportunity for them to pull the upset. I haven't even said INDY WILL WIN, I just don't think it's a lock. I watched Peyton get put in the dirt on way more down than is comfortable, especially when he's in his later 30s now. If that continues, and he gets injured, the season is over. Plain and simple. You're acting like I said that the broncos will finish the season 6-10, or that the final score of this game will be IND 45, DEN 12. Apparently Irsay has no regrets in releasing Manning. (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/colts/2013/10/15/indianapolis-colts-jim-irsay-no-regrets-peyton-manning/2984615/) Quote "We've changed our model a little bit, because we wanted more than one of these," Irsay says, flicking up his right hand to show his Super Bowl XLI championship ring. Nevermind, Peyton is going to light them up. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 16, 2013, 08:09:06 AM I'm acting like a 6-0 fan is concerned about anything other than WE'RE NUMBER 1!!!
If you lose, I'll open the table to concerns. Otherwise, :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 16, 2013, 02:59:07 PM Thing is, Irsay is right, if they'd kept him there's no way they'd be having the success they are right now because of their cap situation.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 16, 2013, 03:05:58 PM Yeah, it was a painful split, but it was the right thing for all parties.
I actually kindof like that Irsay is trying to needle Manning into a verbal scuffle. It brings some soul to the competition. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 16, 2013, 03:29:04 PM Thing is, Irsay is right, if they'd kept him there's no way they'd be having the success they are right now because of their cap situation. His overall point was valid, but his wording was absolutely terrible. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 16, 2013, 03:29:38 PM Well, especially when taken out of context.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 16, 2013, 03:38:47 PM Even in context, it's not much better. They could have gone a long way to giving the teams the tools they needed to win multiple championships when he WAS there.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 16, 2013, 06:34:49 PM Yeah, it was a painful split, but it was the right thing for all parties. I actually kindof like that Irsay is trying to needle Manning into a verbal scuffle. It brings some soul to the competition. As if Manning has ever been seen or heard off the football field, or commercial set. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 18, 2013, 06:03:03 AM Yeah, it was a painful split, but it was the right thing for all parties. I actually kindof like that Irsay is trying to needle Manning into a verbal scuffle. It brings some soul to the competition. As if Manning has ever been seen or heard off the football field, or commercial set. What does Manning have to do with Irsay running his mouth? :headscratch: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MediumHigh on October 18, 2013, 07:20:29 AM Seahawks played a good game against the Cardinals news at 11 :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 18, 2013, 07:41:29 AM One of my favorite Deadspin writers made a comment I really liked:
Quote I love it when the NFL Network or any other network does a dramatic promo for an upcoming game and they have to find a vague way of pimping an awful team involved. THE AMAZING RUSSELL WILSON HAS THE SEAHAWKS GUNNING FOR THE SUPER BOWL, BUT THE CARDINALS ARE...ALSO IN THEIR DIVISION. You can tell they had very little to work with. BUT THE CARDINALS ARE GEARING UP FOR A FIGHT. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 18, 2013, 10:12:37 AM Yeah, it was a painful split, but it was the right thing for all parties. I actually kindof like that Irsay is trying to needle Manning into a verbal scuffle. It brings some soul to the competition. As if Manning has ever been seen or heard off the football field, or commercial set. What does Manning have to do with Irsay running his mouth? :headscratch: Nothing. But the part I bolded is what I was referring to. Manning doesn't talk shit or respond to shit talk. In fact the man is a ghost outside of the football/commercials world. To attempt to needle him is a failed endeavor that Irsay should know already. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 18, 2013, 10:29:26 AM Because we're a good ways into the season and we've seen most of what teams have to offer, I'm going to do some weekend picks for each game against the spread. Feel free to join in as well to see who wins the week, or just to laugh at how little I know about sports betting.
Paelos Week 7 Picks against the Spread: Jets +4 against the Pats Chargers -8 against the Jags Lions -3 against the Bengals Dolphins -7.5 against the Bills Chicago +1 against the Skins Cowboys +2.5 against the Eagles Rams +6.5 against the Panthers Bucs +7 against the Falcons 49ers - 4 against the Titans Chiefs -6.5 against the Texans Cleveland +10 against Green Bay Baltimore +1.5 against the Steelers Denver -7 against the Colts Vikings +3.5 against the Giants The MNF game is Giants and Vikings? That didn't work out for the NFL did it? :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 18, 2013, 02:37:06 PM Gronk is cleared to play
(http://cdn3.sbnation.com/imported_assets/975555/belichick-lets-party_medium.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on October 20, 2013, 01:31:04 PM What a fucking garbage way to end an overtime game.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 20, 2013, 01:38:31 PM Keep laughing at my top 10 Jets, folks. They thrive on your hate. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on October 20, 2013, 01:42:43 PM I don't even give a crap about the AFC east, I just hate to see a game end on a stupid penalty call, I would've been just as happy if he made the field goal and penalty didn't matter.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 20, 2013, 01:44:17 PM Didn't see the call. Was it legit or not?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on October 20, 2013, 01:50:31 PM The Jets had a 56 yd field goal attempt, and a Patriots guy got called for unsportsmanlike conduct for apparently pushing one of his own players to try and get more push on the line. The replay looked like he did it, but not THAT much. I mean, maybe by the letter of the law it was a penalty, I don't know but it didn't strike me as something you don't see on every other field goal attempt. But it felt extremely ticky tacky and immediately cut all the tension of the game because the jets were in easy field goal range after the 15 yards. Made for a terrible spectator experience.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on October 20, 2013, 01:58:00 PM That was a really dumb time to enforce that rule for like the first time ever. I don't like the Pats, but that was fucking stupid. It affected the play in no way at all and wasn't very obvious from any angle.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on October 20, 2013, 02:00:15 PM It's a new rule for 2013. Apparently people were getting injured because of that technique in the past.
Fast forward to around 4 minutes to see it explained: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000227305/article/breaking-down-the-nfls-new-rules-for-2013-season Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 20, 2013, 02:04:47 PM It's a stupid rule. They are doing everything to take special teams out of the game.
I understand the original rule which was putting hands on a teammate to launch a player for a block. This is just inane. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on October 20, 2013, 02:18:07 PM It's a very stupid rule, but seeing as the Pats are rarely penalized for when they break all sorts of other rules, I'll take it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 20, 2013, 02:44:40 PM Against any other team I might think it was a ticky tack call, but Belicheat can just suck it. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on October 20, 2013, 03:03:34 PM They lost it when Brady overthrew three at the end of regulation. After that, the game was just a 50/50.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 20, 2013, 07:50:48 PM You're again misrepresenting my concerns as more dire than they are. I've been discussing the question marks that ARE there, even if we still win. I've said that it could be a close game, and that I see a good opportunity for them to pull the upset. Hey, after all that you might be right. :why_so_serious: Peyton's receivers don't exactly look sharp. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 20, 2013, 07:51:57 PM This isn't on the receivers, this is all Indy's pressure and man coverage. Just like I said. Manning has been off since getting drilled by Mathis.
Edit: Also, Broncos are committing some really terrible frustration fueled penalties. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 20, 2013, 07:59:30 PM Time to move the Jets in front of the Broncos in the power rankings! :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on October 20, 2013, 09:15:49 PM How many stupid personal fouls does Vickerson need to get called for before they bench him. Jesus fucking christ what a manchild.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 20, 2013, 09:26:35 PM How many stupid personal fouls does Vickerson need to get called for before they bench him. Jesus fucking christ what a manchild. That last one had a LITTLE bit of BS flopping by Luck, but he shouldn't be doing something like that anyway, so... yeah... It wa a bit bizarre as he hasn't had any issues this season until now. I think the broncos may make some trades in the next couple of weeks. If this really is Superbowl-Or-Bust, there are some major issues that we need to address before the post season, especially with KC rolling along. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on October 21, 2013, 06:21:40 AM The call on the Pats wasn't even correct.
Original google cache of new rule here. (http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000237712/article/new-nfl-rules-overloading-line-restriction-will-protect-linemen) Players NOT on line of scrimmage can't push. (Jones was very obviously on the line) That page was then updated after the game and the text about the line of scrimmage was removed as it has been in all other posts on nfl.com. Belichick knew the rule better than the refs because you can hear him screaming at them 'He was on the line of scrimmage'. :oh_i_see: Betting that the channels that carry the NFL will refuse to followup on that particular coverup. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 21, 2013, 07:50:17 AM A rule was invented for the Patriots, so they can go fuck themselves.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on October 21, 2013, 08:14:24 AM Sigh no. The tuck rule was a shitty rule that shouldn't existed that was applied correctly.
This is the NFL knowing they fucked up and trying to actually to cover it up. The Pats should've still lost cause of their shitty defense and shitty play calling in OT. Fuck the NFL and their arrogance. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 21, 2013, 08:21:55 AM Not the tuck rule. The going low on QBs rule BECAUSE OH NOES BRADY GOT HURT ONCE.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 21, 2013, 10:29:48 AM (http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-uQfhPNbE_2w/UmRzZBUbT1I/AAAAAAAAAcg/xeH4v9lqBq4/s1600/smith1.gif)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 21, 2013, 10:32:13 AM That wasn't designed, right? Completely broken, yes?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on October 21, 2013, 10:35:56 AM Not the tuck rule. The going low on QBs rule BECAUSE OH NOES BRADY GOT HURT ONCE. That also happened to Rothlesberger, Palmer and at least one other I'm forgetting. A 300lb man diving into a guy's planted leg is going to cause some carnage. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on October 21, 2013, 11:22:53 AM That wasn't designed, right? Completely broken, yes? Not designed, completely broken. Charles said he went the wrong way Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 21, 2013, 11:25:53 AM I watched the Dallas/Philly game and should have gone with the Jets/Pats instead. Both the Cowboys and the Eagles looked like shit the first half, and not much better the second half. Foles was completely lost and is now probably out of the starting QB picture though Barkley certainly didn't look like a viable option either. Without Murray, the Cowboys can't run for shit. They are going to get lit up in the playoffs.
The Denver/Indy game was a whole other thing. Indy's press coverage worked and that was against really good receivers. So why couldn't they beat San Diego? Manning got beat up all night and by the 3rd quarter, it looked like he'd lost all arm strength. He got it back but still he didn't look quite right. That fumble by Hillman didn't have to mean the end of the game, but that Vickerson penalty? That sure as shit did. And it was utter stupidity on his part too. He didn't even need to touch Luck at all and it was so obvious that Luck took advantage of it with a flop. But it totally wiped out a 3rd down incompletion that would have left Indy punting from deep. Then on the punts right after the 2-minute warning... Yes, the first offsetting penalty was necessary but the time they lost with a 2nd then a third kick - why accept some of those penalties? The time got wasted and nothing came of the final drive. Green Bay beat the shit out of Cleveland even without James Jones. I feel bad for Cleveland - if not for one stupid, badly-executed slide by Brian Hoyer, they might have a shot at the playoffs this year. They still might as the Ravens are doing their best to lose. But they were so much better under Hoyer. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 21, 2013, 11:44:35 AM The Hillman fumble was the end because it completely deflated the teams momentum.
Honestly, if you look at what Manning did towards the end of the game, it was because he just gave up trusting the Offensive Line and chucked it. It's almost like we're missing our starting tackles. Manning was hurried/rushed all game because we could not get good pass protection. And Julius Thomas is TERRIBLE at blocking. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 21, 2013, 12:03:42 PM That wasn't designed, right? Completely broken, yes? It looks like it was designed to me, the running back goes right for a block which opens up the hole for Smith to run through. Edit: ok, well I guess Charles would know. Nice improv on a busted play, though. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on October 21, 2013, 12:05:08 PM Smith said that it was a designed run. I just think Charles went the wrong way so it looked funny.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 21, 2013, 12:31:28 PM AND IT WORKED. It should NOT have worked, but it did. the defender just stood there staring at Smith, until Smith decided to book for it. It was cartoonish.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 21, 2013, 01:42:28 PM He was probably trying to process what Smith was doing just holding out the ball like that.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 21, 2013, 01:49:38 PM So Josh Freeman can win me my fantasy league game this week if he can get me more than 16 points. :oh_i_see:
Good thing they are playing the Giants. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 21, 2013, 02:10:14 PM That may not be enough. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 21, 2013, 02:43:09 PM He was probably trying to process what Smith was doing just holding out the ball like that. I think they BOTH were. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 21, 2013, 02:51:15 PM That may not be enough. :grin: No shit. He's bad. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 21, 2013, 03:10:28 PM Cutler out at least 4 weeks with a torn groin muscle. Reggie Wayne done for the season with a torn ACL.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 21, 2013, 03:35:45 PM Bradford is also out for the year and things are kind of up in the air with Doug Martin. I kind of hope Martin shuts himself down if the team doesn't so he can come back at full strength next year with a new coaching staff.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 21, 2013, 04:37:09 PM I'm not sure what's going to happen with Finley, but I dropped him. I hope he doesn't play this year after that. It was terrifying.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 21, 2013, 07:51:36 PM Holy crap the Minnesota offensive line is the worst in football.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on October 21, 2013, 09:57:12 PM That entire game was appalling.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on October 21, 2013, 10:25:19 PM Starting to feel like maybe they need size/strength caps for these guys so they can't hurt each other as badly.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on October 22, 2013, 12:15:46 AM WOO THE GIANTS WON A GAAAAAAAME
WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 22, 2013, 06:05:30 AM And I shall just put this here for future use... which I assume will get A LOT of future use around here. :why_so_serious:
http://www.manningface.com/ Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 22, 2013, 07:57:58 AM Paelos Week 7 Picks against the Spread: Jets +4 against the Pats - W Chargers -8 against the Jags - W Lions -3 against the Bengals - L Dolphins -7.5 against the Bills - L Chicago +1 against the Skins - L Cowboys +2.5 against the Eagles - W Rams +6.5 against the Panthers - L Bucs +7 against the Falcons - L 49ers - 4 against the Titans - W Chiefs -6.5 against the Texans - L Cleveland +10 against Green Bay - L Baltimore +1.5 against the Steelers - L Denver -7 against the Colts - L Vikings +3.5 against the Giants - L Hey that went poorly at the end. 4-10? Glad I don't do this for a living. The worst loss was Tampa by a point, and the Chiefs absolutely struggling with a wretched Texans team. Oh and RG3 scoring late on the Bears. There were a lot of bad choices here. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 22, 2013, 08:02:55 AM Paelos Power Rankings Week 7:
1 - Denver 2 - Seattle 3 - KC 4 - Saints 5 - Patriots 6 - Dallas 7 - Green Bay 8 - Indy 9 - Cincy 10 - Jets Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on October 22, 2013, 08:07:34 AM Peyton's arm looked all waffley.
Looked like the Colts were daring him to throw over the top along the line 15+ yards and he kept under throwing the balls. Also, no time on that shit O-Line. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 22, 2013, 08:11:18 AM http://msn.foxsports.com/lacesout/this-gif-of-andy-reid-as-the-kool-aid-man-will-make-you-smile/
It does make me smile. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on October 22, 2013, 08:16:26 AM Paelos Power Rankings Week 7: 1 - Denver 2 - Seattle 3 - KC 4 - Saints 5 - Patriots 6 - Dallas 7 - Green Bay 8 - Indy 9 - Cincy 10 - Jets What, my giants didn't get bumped up onto this list with their big win over the vikings last night? :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on October 22, 2013, 08:18:29 AM Paelos Power Rankings Week 7: 1 - Denver 2 - Seattle 3 - KC 4 - Saints 5 - Patriots 6 - Dallas 7 - Green Bay 8 - Indy 9 - Cincy 10 - Jets I think at this point I'd switch the Pats and Indy, otherwise I agree Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 22, 2013, 08:25:55 AM I'm not sure what's going to happen with Finley, but I dropped him. I hope he doesn't play this year after that. It was terrifying. Bruised spinal column, coach says he's out indefinitely. I don't see him getting back on the field this year and I'm not sure he'll be effective even if he does. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 22, 2013, 08:33:59 AM I think at this point I'd switch the Pats and Indy, otherwise I agree Indy's position is the toughest for me to place. On the one hand, they have some extremely solid wins. On the other hand, they've looked completely inept in their losses to very average teams. My biggest concern of Indy is that their defense is spotty, and if Luck has an off day they will lose with no defensive safety net. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ruvaldt on October 22, 2013, 08:52:16 AM But they're somehow worse than Dallas?
I would put Indy at 4 or 5. They've beaten both your #1 and #2 teams as well as San Francisco, which is oddly missing from your top 10. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 22, 2013, 09:04:26 AM Dallas is not that good. They aren't in the top 10. They struggled against PHILLY, who has one of the worst pass defenses in the league. Indy is a better team, though with Reggie Wayne out for the year, they ain't as good as they were. It still makes my balls itch to see the Jets in there and not have a convincing argument for not including them in the top 10. But based on the other teams around their record, they somehow deserve it. Also, I'd put the Pats lower than Green Bay. Maybe it's because I'm a homer or because the Pats defense is seriously suspect against the run while Green Bay's run defense is killer.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 22, 2013, 10:26:38 AM Haemish is a GB homer so unless they are top 5 I'm sure he's not happy. :grin:
Indy and SF bug me. Can't put my finger on it, but I'm not buying them as a legit contender for the top spot. San Francisco has fallen off the earth year both passing and defensively against teams with an offensive pulse, but they are going through a stretch before the bye week where they are playing absolute garbage. Kaepernick is having a hard time without his receivers, and in some cases with his health and one of the middle ranked O-lines. Indy has the best wins, but they struggle with odd things that get bigger late in a season. Their run blocking is outstanding, but their pass protection is iffy. Their pass defense and pass rush is outstanding, but their run defense is on par with Buffalo. Their red zone TD percentage is top 10, but they only get in the red zone about 3 times a game, which is 19th in the league. Something just doesn't feel right about both teams. I think they are missing something, and I'm waiting to see more. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 22, 2013, 10:58:18 AM I'll agree with your about SF and Indy. SF's receivers are just iffy beyond Boldin and if Davis isn't in the game, they have no passing game. Luckily, they can still run the ball most of the time and their defense is at least top half of the league. Indy is struggling with inconsistency - if they'd played Denver the way they did against San Diego, Denver would have TATTOOED them with a picture of Peyton's dick.
I don't know what Green Bay deserves a top 5 spot, but they sure as fuck are better than Dallas and probably the Pats. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on October 22, 2013, 11:50:15 AM Really, I think 1-Den, 2-KC, 3-Sea, 4-NO, 5-7 is a mix of GB/Dal/Indy, 8-10 SF/Cincy/NE but I figured the most glaring thing was that Indy was too low
Dallas is not that good. They aren't in the top 10. They struggled against PHILLY, who has one of the worst pass defenses in the league. Their losses were by 1 point and 3 points to KC and Den respectively (the #1 and #2 teams arguably), with their 3rd loss being a winnable game against an underrated SD. And I think SD is being underestimated when viewing rankings because they're kind of a patch work team being led by a rejuvenated Rivers and a miraculously still-not-injured Matthews. So I think Dal does have an argument for being in the 5-8 range, right where GB should be as well. For the Packers, I think with them missing Finley and Cobb, and Jones still being day to day, they aren't above a Wayne-less Indy team just yet. GB has done as expected, except against Bal where I would have expected more from them than a 19-17 win. Though at these rankings it's a crapshoot past #4 imo, but at least clusters are starting to form. The more I think about it, the more I think NE is a bit too high though. The only game they've won in a way that would be expected of someone in their rank was against TB. They beat the Saints by 3 which gives them some credit to being in the top 10, but losing to Cin 6-13 ( :uhrr:) and then to the NYJ 27-30, and only beating the bills 23-21 doesn't really sit well to place them above GB, or Indy Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 22, 2013, 12:01:55 PM The problem is the Pats will still win their division, get healthy, and then who knows? I don't necessarily believe that GB will win that division. Dallas might, but nobody in the NFC is really making a big case to be taken seriously outside of the Seahawks and Saints. I could legimately take out both Dallas and GB, roll out nothing but AFC teams in the remaining 8 spots, and probably not be that far off either right now.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on October 22, 2013, 12:05:26 PM Chicago is without Cutler and Lance Briggs for at least 4 weeks. I'd be willing to bet GB still wins that division unless the Lions don't have their yearly meltdown.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 22, 2013, 12:19:09 PM Chicago is without Cutler and Lance Briggs for at least 4 weeks. I'd be willing to bet GB still wins that division unless the Lions don't have their yearly meltdown. I'd counter that by saying that I think McCown is one of the better backups in the league, and can see them through the stretch as long as Forte is still healthy. Realistically, a loss of Forte would be more damaging to the Bears than Culter, imo. Plus their defense is entirely predicated on turnovers and scoring. And they have the best kick return games in the league. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on October 22, 2013, 12:26:22 PM I guess we will see. The Bears have a very favorable schedule the rest of the way. Really the only tough games are the divisional teams.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on October 22, 2013, 12:32:59 PM As much as I dislike the Packers, I don't think you're giving them their due credit (or SF). They've done well with a tougher schedule than what NE has put up with and GB is winning that division, which hurts me to say.
Also, the Pats aren't going to be much better when they "get healthy," since they're only missing Vareen as he's the only one DFR. Now, if their WRs keep developing then sure, they'll be more dangerous, but as of today and right now GB > NE. As for Chi, McCown is a good backup to have, definitely. However, their favorable schedule does not start until they face Bal->STL->Min, which is around the time Cutler will be back anyways. It's just a matter of how big of a deficit will GB and Det be able to create in that time span. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 22, 2013, 02:30:13 PM Chicago is without Cutler and Lance Briggs for at least 4 weeks. I'd be willing to bet GB still wins that division unless the Lions don't have their yearly meltdown. This. Both Chicago's and the Lions' defenses are pretty crappy against teams that can pass the ball. I suspect Green Bay will sweep their division games or lose 1 at worst. Both the Lions and the Bears are improved over last year but they aren't better than Green Bay. Losing Cutler for at least 3 games and maybe more? They are going to get rung up. Those 3 games after the bye w/o Cutler and Briggs? At Green Bay, home against Detroit and Baltimore. If they win one of those games, I'll be surprised. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on October 22, 2013, 03:35:46 PM I won't be surprised if Chi wins win one, only because in one of the games they're playing Flacco :why_so_serious:
I also wouldn't be surprised if Det beats GB. GB beat a Det without Calvin Johnson, which is much easier to do than to beat a Det without Bush. Add to the fact that now GB is without Cobb and Finley and that is not the same matchup as it was a couple weeks ago Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on October 22, 2013, 06:32:23 PM And I shall just put this here for future use... which I assume will get A LOT of future use around here. :why_so_serious: http://www.manningface.com/ (http://www.totalprosports.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/manning-brothers-peyton-and-eli-rapping-football-on-your-phone.png) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on October 23, 2013, 01:20:11 AM Oh yay, last time I checked manningface hadn't updated for a while.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: taolurker on October 23, 2013, 07:48:25 AM (http://i.imgur.com/o3xp0wa.gif)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on October 23, 2013, 08:21:46 AM I'm glad I actually watched that game and got to see that sack live. Given that the rest of the game was garbage, at least I got something out of it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 23, 2013, 08:29:50 AM Yep that one sack is one of the best sacks of the season.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 23, 2013, 09:29:39 AM It was hilarious live. It seemed like Eli had an aneurysm and just fell down.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 23, 2013, 09:37:54 AM Freeman has concussion symptoms; Ponder to start. (https://twitter.com/Vikings/status/393051896660779008)
In a year that we have the Jacksonville Jaguars, the Vikings are really giving them a run for most terrible hilarity. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 23, 2013, 09:54:07 AM Browns bench Weedon, Campbell to start against the Chiefs (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9866703/cleveland-browns-bench-brandon-weeden-name-jason-campbell-qb).
I think the Weedon era in Cleveland is over. He's been benched twice in one season, his completion percentage and yards per pass are bottom or almost bottom in the league and he's turned it over more than he's thrown TD's. Campbell may not do much better but he really couldn't do much worse. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 23, 2013, 09:58:14 AM Quote Campbell will be the 20th quarterback to start a game for the Browns since 1999. :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 23, 2013, 10:07:14 AM Not surprising nor tragic. Hoyer has been the only real glimmer of hope and he went broke himself in the stupidest of ways. I think I am more shocked that the Browns haven't shipped Gordon off yet.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 23, 2013, 10:11:23 AM I guess Ponder is going to have to survive on his wife's paycheck now.
EDIT: Also the Browns SEEM to be drafting well. Last 3 years they got Mingo, Josh Gordon, Richardson (now traded), and some good line guys. They just need to get into the QB sweepstakes for next season. If they can find that piece, they have the rest to make it work. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 23, 2013, 12:25:09 PM I guess Ponder is going to have to survive on his wife's paycheck now. Ponder likely to start with Freeman suffering from a head injury (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9867514/christian-ponder-likely-minnesota-vikings-qb-josh-freeman-concussed) A concussion might explain why Freeman overthrew so many guys on Monday night. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 23, 2013, 12:27:09 PM another explanation might be that he is a bad football player. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 23, 2013, 12:34:15 PM Or that he had only been with the team for 8 days and didn't know the playbook yet.
Or really, a combination of all these things. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 23, 2013, 03:39:11 PM So who has the worst QB situation now? It seemed to be clearly the Jaguars at the beginning of the season but the Vikings and Browns are trying really hard to catch up. They're so terrible that even Pryor with Oakland and Glennon in Tampa look good by comparison.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 23, 2013, 04:14:15 PM So who has the worst QB situation now? It seemed to be clearly the Jaguars at the beginning of the season but the Vikings and Browns are trying really hard to catch up. They're so terrible that even Pryor with Oakland and Glennon in Tampa look good by comparison. The Browns perennially have the worst QB situation in the history of the NFL. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 23, 2013, 04:59:38 PM It's a combination of Cleveland, Minnesota, Jacksonville, and probably Tampa.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on October 24, 2013, 07:59:57 AM Don;t forget my Eagles. Vick is going to play this weekend, but it is almost guaranteed he will re-injure his hammy and then we are left with dogshit and catshit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 24, 2013, 08:06:39 AM The Eagles can at least try out Barkley if they want to have a fall-back position.
But yeah, my position on USC QBs is well-documented at this point. I never would have drafted him in the first place. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 24, 2013, 08:08:58 AM The Eagles can at least try out Barkley if they want to have a fall-back position. I would say he can't turn it over anymore than Vick will, but his 1 1/2 quarters of work against the Cowboys has proven me wrong already. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on October 24, 2013, 08:27:11 AM The Rams contacted Favre to see if he would come back:
ProFootballtalk.com (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/10/24/rams-call-brett-favre-but-hes-not-returning/) Fortunately he said no. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 24, 2013, 08:28:32 AM :facepalm:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on October 24, 2013, 08:42:29 AM Wow... just wow.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 24, 2013, 08:43:39 AM I'm sure he just texted back his response.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 24, 2013, 08:54:42 AM I guess that was after Vinny said no?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 24, 2013, 08:56:14 AM The Rams contacted Favre to see if he would come back: ProFootballtalk.com (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/10/24/rams-call-brett-favre-but-hes-not-returning/) Fortunately he said no. fortunately? That would have been HILARIOUS. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on October 24, 2013, 09:36:36 AM I'm sure he just texted back his response. Was his response a picture of his junk? Or could that be interpreted as a yes? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 24, 2013, 09:52:28 AM Depends on whether it was flaccid or erect, one would suppose.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on October 24, 2013, 02:23:45 PM Jeff Garcia would like the NFL to know that he's ready to play. He hasn't played in the NFL since 2009. Don't everyone rush to the phone at once now!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 24, 2013, 03:02:35 PM So is anyone planning on watching the travesty that will be tonight's game? I imagine it'll be like watching a pair of one-legged dogs trying to fuck on ice.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on October 24, 2013, 03:05:09 PM I hope Carolina just runs a train on them so that cocksucker Schiano gets fired tomorrow morning.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 24, 2013, 04:57:03 PM So is anyone planning on watching the travesty that will be tonight's game? I imagine it'll be like watching a pair of one-legged dogs trying to fuck on ice. I'll be eating a burger, drinking a beer and then watching RiffTrax. I'm good. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 24, 2013, 05:23:39 PM I hope Carolina just runs a train on them so that cocksucker Schiano gets fired tomorrow morning. I've been actively rooting against Tampa for a while now hoping for this outcome. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 24, 2013, 05:28:17 PM It's only a matter of whether they want to fire him during the season or after he's secured the #1 pick.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 24, 2013, 05:29:40 PM I'd rather he go sooner rather than later so he can't wreck Doug Martin.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 24, 2013, 05:30:37 PM I'd rather he go sooner rather than later so he can't wreck Doug Martin. If I was Doug I'd be very careful about coming back. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 24, 2013, 05:35:04 PM Also, I don't think they'd have to worry much about winning many more games if they replace Schiano now, since they'd probably just install the Wannstache as interim head coach.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: taolurker on October 25, 2013, 04:50:45 AM Brett Favre acknowledges some memory loss (http://www.sunherald.com/2013/10/24/5057915/brett-favre-acknowledges-some.html)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on October 25, 2013, 01:07:26 PM Well if he ever forgets what his penis looks like, he can check the internet.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 25, 2013, 01:23:23 PM Well if he ever forgets what his penis looks like, he can check the internet. :rimshot: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 25, 2013, 03:47:31 PM From reddit: current strength of schedule for all teams (also adjusted to exclude own wins and losses).
(http://i.imgur.com/aqxdXfU.png) Poor poor Jags, they really can't catch a break. At the other end, the ease of the Chiefs' schedule does somewhat underscore the notion that they are not a solid top-5 team. Vikes, Bucs, Steelers, and Giants are junk, but that's not news. Perhaps the team in here which deserves the most credit are the Titans, I've thought that they have played some hard football this season and are generally underrated. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 27, 2013, 01:24:24 PM I'm unsure of the rule, but I think the refs just fucked the Cowboys out of a win if they didn't apply the clock right.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on October 27, 2013, 01:28:28 PM Wow Lions! Calvin Johnson career day. 329yds, 2nd most in NFL history. Stafford 488yds and he sneaks one past the goalie. Brilliant move.
Wow. Hard to believe they won after FOUR turnovers. Cowboys played pretty good too. That Dez Bryant is a cock though. What a game, crazy stuff. This is why I watch the NFL. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 27, 2013, 01:31:14 PM I looked up the rule, I'm still not clear what happens when they declined the penalty. If they accept it, the clock stops, but they Cowboys would get another down. Since they declined it, I'm unsure why the hell the clock didn't start. That would have left the Lions 25s, not over a minute.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 27, 2013, 02:02:19 PM Lol, Cowboys. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on October 27, 2013, 02:04:04 PM No one wants to win the NFC East this year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 27, 2013, 05:10:49 PM No one wants to win the NFC East this year. It's a train wreck. The Giants are actually in the hunt, which is fucking disgusting from both an "I hate them" level, and a "This shouldn't be" level. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on October 27, 2013, 05:36:22 PM Week 8 is mostly over and I can't tell who are favorites in some of these dumpster fire divisions. Giants are two games out of the lead FFS. Oh LOL at the Steelers. Atlanta is for real. Real in the sense that they really suck.
I ASSUME THE JETS WILL LEAVE THE TOP TEN. AGAIN. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 27, 2013, 06:45:58 PM Atlanta was DOA the moment they signed their QB to a multimillion dollar deal, and subsequently cut all of their trench player talent. The fans were just delusional enough to believe that skill players somehow win you games.
Green Bay is performing much better without their skill guys because they've developed a running game. And their line play has improved from terrible to passable. Denver had a hangover until the second half, then they took some Anacin and got over it. Dallas continues to do really REALLY stupid shit. The coach isn't coaching, and owner is still trying to play GM. Meanwhile the best receiver is off the leash and trying to bite every hand he can. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on October 27, 2013, 08:30:14 PM The Giants are totally making a run, boys! :why_so_serious:
(seriously why is our division so bad) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 28, 2013, 03:31:23 AM The Bengals aren't brilliant, but they aren't half bad either.
I'm also really impressed by the Bills D in general. There's not enough of an offence there for them to carry, but I see them being a growing force. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on October 28, 2013, 06:35:02 AM The Giants are totally making a run, boys! :why_so_serious: (seriously why is our division so bad) Jerry Jones, Dan Snyder and whoever owns the Eagles. That's why. Enjoy! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 28, 2013, 08:55:11 AM And I repeat, LOL COWBOYS. That game was just all sorts of :drill: :ye_gods: :uhrr: :oh_i_see: :ye_gods: What the hell was wrong with Romo? He should have eaten that shitty Detroit secondary ALIVE. But he just didn't. Their running game is dogshit without Murray and isn't great with him. Really though, with the way their defense played for the first 3 quarters, the Cowboys should have been running away with it. And yet, they just can't put 60 minutes together against any sort of decent offense. And Dez Bryant is quickly heading into Terrell Owens land - he has the talent to be a #1 wide receiver, but he needs to shut the fuck up and play. Also, he needs a coach because the Cowboys do not have a coach. Garrett just either can't or won't take hold of this team by the scruff of the neck and make them play championship football. I can only guess that it's Jerry Jones that is the real problem - he doesn't let the coach have final authority and so guys just don't respect the coach enough to be professionals. I reiterate - this team will not win the Super Bowl again as long as Jerry Jones is alive. They are a fucking joke with way too much talent to be this bad. Oh and Calvin Johnson - that man is a freak. Catching balls with guys just draped all over him is sick. What was sicker is how open he got in the 2nd half.
Denver took way too long to get going but once they did, it was way over. The Redskins do not have a good enough defense to have kept them down for as long as they did. Griffin is still not right and I don't think he's going to be right the rest of this year. The fact that every team in the shitpile of a division that is the NFC East has a shot at the playoffs at this point is just disgusting. Otherwise, they should shut RGIII down and let him recuperate for next year. Denver meanwhile needs to figure out why they are starting so slow. They have got to figure out the pass blocking, because Peyton had way too much scrambling to do early. The Green Bay/Minnesota game was glorious. Holy fuck, Minnesota is just a shitty team. Their defense can't stop either the run or the pass. They can't throw the ball for shit with any of the three QB's they have on the roster - and that situation is not improving this season. Too bad they beat Pittsburgh because they need to be in the #1 draft pick sweepstakes next year and both Tampa and Jacksonville are beating them at that as well. With Adrian Peterson on the roster, there is no reason the QB shouldn't be able to find Jennings wide open SOMETIME... or Rudolph or Patterson, both of whom have the talent to be good. Ponder just runs at the first sign of trouble and their line didn't seem able to block anyone either. AP is averaging 4.5 yards a carry. The Vikings ought to be in lots of 3rd and 4 or better situations with that kind of running game but it isn't helping. They are just awful. Meanwhile, Aaron Rodgers is a beast and Jordy Nelson is an elite receiver. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 28, 2013, 09:12:49 AM Most of broncos points have come in the 3rd quarter. All year, this has been the case. They have been quite open with the fat that they view the first half as "let's play around with some plays and see what they do" and then they adjust at halftime. Sometimes "playing around" scores them 14+ points. As for the Offensive Line? I've been discussing this all season. Injuries. Injuries Injuries. We got a somewhat still injured Orlando Franklin back, but we're just banged up.
When Franklin was going to be out last week and we had to shuffle multiple players along the O-Line, I talked about that being part of the blueprint for Indy's success, and hey, guess what, that panned out. However, JD Walton should be back by the Chargers game (13 days to decide), and that should help tremendously, even though Ramirez has been great at Center. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on October 28, 2013, 05:47:19 PM Wife just showed me the Grand Finale of the Detroit/Dallas game. That was fucking awesome. Thank you, Fantasy Football.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 28, 2013, 08:11:17 PM Seattle deserves to lose this game against the Rams. Good grief, did half the league forget that linemen are important?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 29, 2013, 11:04:32 AM This was a tough week. I had a lot to consider with the way some of these teams are playing, and how they are responding to injuries. Seattle takes a large tumble because I'm starting to see that their offensive line is a gigantic problem. They are living on defensive talent, and a functional offense would blast them right now. Green Bay moves up because they have worked past the injuries, developed a running game, and are still putting up large point totals with basically one named receiver. I questioned how they would respond, and they have responded in a big way. The Saints are scary too, and if you're not considering them as a possible Super Bowl Champ, you need to take a second look. With their schedule and scoring potential they could easily go 12-4 or 11-5 and wrap up a #1 or #2 seed in the NFC. Plus Ryan has retooled that defense into a top 10 team in sacks, top 5 in opposing passer rating, and top 5 in points against.
Paelos Power Rankings Week 8: 1 - Denver 2 - KC 3 - Saints 4 - GB 5 - Seattle 6 - SF 7 - Indy 8 - NE 9 - Cincy 10 - Detroit Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 29, 2013, 12:05:54 PM Yes. yes please. god yes. (http://images.ftw.usatoday.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/JaredAllenSackEliAroundOL2.gif) With ten minutes to go before the deadline, sounds like all trade talks over Allen are now dead. :( Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on October 29, 2013, 12:06:45 PM That's a shitty list- No Jets.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 29, 2013, 12:23:30 PM My top 10 list is a bit different.
1 - Denver 2 - Saints 3 - KC 4 - SF 5 - GB 6 - Seattle 7 - Indy 8 - Cincy 9 - NE 10 - Detroit I'm torn on #10. Detroit really shouldn't have won that game, but then Dallas should have made that game a rout so... I could easily switch out Carolina or San Diego for Detroit because I think both teams are inconsistent. They are world beaters one week and chumps the next. San Diego's offense can be frightening even without a running game. Carolina's defense is apparently playing lights out. And Detroit has Megatron and Reggie Bush. I think San Fran is better than Seattle overall, they are just now starting to play like it. And it's a tossup on GB or Seattle being better and Indy did beat both SF and Seattle. Seattle's road form is just not good. If they have to go through New Orleans, forget about it. And yes, I did put KC 3rd even though they are 8-0 - I want to see how that defense handles Denver before I'm convinced they are better than both New Orleans (whose defense is back in a big way) and Denver. The best team KC has beaten is Dallas... and they aren't in the top 10. Also, I really wish a taunting penalty on a TD like that bullshit Golden Tate picked up last night would erase the TD. Fuck him. He's quickly becoming one of my most hated players. I wish someone would have just clotheslined his douchey ass on that pass last night. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 29, 2013, 12:50:04 PM The best team KC has beaten is Dallas... and they aren't in the top 10. Which is true of the Broncos too, to be fair. Edit: Speaking of the Chiefs, NFL Forbids Chiefs From Creating Their Own Schedule Again Next Season (http://www.theonion.com/articles/nfl-forbids-chiefs-from-creating-their-own-schedul,34380/) :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 29, 2013, 03:06:56 PM Y'all need to rate the Colts higher than 7th. They are a better team than the pack and the 49ers for sure; hell they've beaten the Seahawks, 49ers, and Broncos. Other than that curious loss to the chargers (all teams have bad weeks) they've found ways to win. Toss in the league's ~4th hardest schedule and you really need to put them higher on those lists. Green Bay needs to be lower; I know Aaron Rodgers is elite, and they're doing impressive stuff with what they have, but their only win against a top-10 team is against the Lions, who are as inconsistent as they come. The rest of their wins are against garbage teams (Washington, Cleveland, Minnesota, Ravens). They have also lost to the 49ers and Bengals. The 49ers have only lost to better teams, the Seahawks and the Colts; there's no way they can be lower than Green Bay. Sure, it doesn't seem to make a lot of sense, and it's hard to see why they are better, but on the face of it they are the better team.
My top 10 would look like: 1 - Indianapolis 2 - Denver 3 - New Orleans 4 - Kansas City 5 - Seattle 6 - San Francisco 7 - Cincinnati 8 - Green Bay 9 - New England 10 - Detroit Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 29, 2013, 04:53:24 PM The Colts have 2 great wins and 2 bad losses. That doesn't bode well for them in the playoffs. That's why I have them where they are.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on October 29, 2013, 08:48:18 PM The Colts have been inconsistent, which is why they aren't higher on the list. That loss to the Chargers really hurt their standing in my eyes, because I don't think the Chargers defense is as good as it was in that game. But like I've said all season, after 1 and 2, most of it's a tossup. Hell, these days I'm not even sure about Denver or New Orleans. Denver's defense is just not as stifling as I expected.
My ranking of GB higher than both the Colts and Seahawks is because when push comes to shove, I think Rodgers is a better QB than Wilson or Luck because of his experience - and that shows in how little talent he has to throw to right now. Luck is going to be missing Reggie Wayne something fierce against defenses like Arizona, Cincy and KC. Wilson's supporting cast is good but not great and both Rice and Harvin are injury prone. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on October 30, 2013, 10:30:05 AM If anybody watched that Seattle offensive line against the Rams, I don't think anybody could take them seriously as a super bowl winner right now. A lot of that is injury, but man, it was horrific.
There were 7 sacks on Seattle in one game. SEVEN. Denver only has 11 all season. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on October 30, 2013, 12:53:24 PM There were 7 sacks on Seattle in one game. SEVEN. Denver only has 11 all season. O-line is even worse in comparison when remembering that Sea has a mobile QB, Den has a stationary turret that people still can't reach. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 30, 2013, 01:27:12 PM Franklin being back this week helped the broncos tremendously. Plus, screens.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on October 30, 2013, 04:19:02 PM The average height of the remaining Seattle receivers is less than 6 feet tall. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on October 30, 2013, 04:52:05 PM yeah, the receivers are part of the seattle puzzle.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on October 31, 2013, 09:07:09 PM Trying to pass from your own endzone in overtime might not have been the best of ideas, Cincinnati.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on October 31, 2013, 11:44:08 PM :roflcopter: :roflcopter: :roflcopter:
I want all OT games to end like that for the rest of the season, MAKE IT HAPPEN PEOPLE. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on October 31, 2013, 11:53:40 PM I give this win to Jonathan Martin. Hopefully his leave of absence woke the team up a bit.
Also, protip to the media: odds are there's likely a problem with a team or its coaching when the most gifted/smartest player on your team (2nd generation ivy league Stanford grad) takes a walk, especially after being incessantly hazed for 2-years and misused by coaching staff. Kinda sick that they'd label him as having an "emotional issue" that requires some kind of treatment. Seriously?? LMAO Apparently the football world is that stupid. As if in a professional environment a guy is just supposed to sit there and take it. Look for some backlash by the end of this week that goes against the team and hopefully Martin gets to play for a proper organization. Not the phins. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: kaid on November 01, 2013, 06:52:08 AM If anybody watched that Seattle offensive line against the Rams, I don't think anybody could take them seriously as a super bowl winner right now. A lot of that is injury, but man, it was horrific. There were 7 sacks on Seattle in one game. SEVEN. Denver only has 11 all season. I have a hard time excusing injuries on a teams performance when you look at the crap the packers have had to handle and are still winning in convincing fashion. When all but one of our WR got broken we said fuck it lets do this running game thing and they did and its working well for them. Rodgers may only have one named WR but my god in that last game some of those passes. He threw a couple huge receptions that basically were an inch from the defenders ear hole. One of the commentators even mentioned that if you think a pass may be coming put your hand by your ear hole because that is probably where the ball is going to be coming. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: kaid on November 01, 2013, 06:54:54 AM I give this win to Jonathan Martin. Hopefully his leave of absence woke the team up a bit. Also, protip to the media: odds are there's likely a problem with a team or its coaching when the most gifted/smartest player on your team (2nd generation ivy league Stanford grad) takes a walk, especially after being incessantly hazed for 2-years and misused by coaching staff. Kinda sick that they'd label him as having an "emotional issue" that requires some kind of treatment. Seriously?? LMAO Apparently the football world is that stupid. As if in a professional environment a guy is just supposed to sit there and take it. Look for some backlash by the end of this week that goes against the team and hopefully Martin gets to play for a proper organization. Not the phins. Sounds like he put up with that shit for a couple years which is about a year longer than I would have. Given his education I would simply say to the fis coaching staff either get this fixed to at least have people act like professionals/trade me/ or I quit and go use my education to make money in a non hostile working environment. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 01, 2013, 09:00:24 AM No one wants to win the NFC East this year. No in should win the NFC East this year. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 01, 2013, 09:32:09 AM :roflcopter: :roflcopter: :roflcopter: I want all OT games to end like that for the rest of the season, MAKE IT HAPPEN PEOPLE. Fuck's sake, but did Cincy's coaching staff just give that game away? Little more than a minute to go, Cincy offense around the Miami 40 yard line. 2 shitty runs, then a 3rd down pass that might as well have been a hail mary? THE FUCK? Were you even trying to win? Why wouldn't you throw a screen, or a short slant, or something really high percentage and try to 1) give your kicker something easier than a 54-yard field goal, or 2) try to get the first down AND keep the clock running so Miami wouldn't have time to try a tying field goal? So ok, that one works out and they go ahead with 40 seconds left - and their defense blows it. Cut to OT and the Bengals are down around the Miami 40 again, too far for a field goal. Run, run, stupid shitty long pass that doesn't work and now they have to punt. THE FUCK? It was the same sequence of equally ineffective play calling as in the 4th quarter. Maybe that shit was audibled by Dalton but whoever was responsible needs to be running some fucking laps. They basically gave the game away. Miami's offense certainly didn't deserve that many chances, though I will give their defense credit for causing so many turnovers. Dalton threw two really bad balls that were picked and one that the receiver just gave away for an INT. That tip drill INT should never have been thrown - the guy had like 4 Dolphins around him. As for the Fins, I can trace everyone of their offensive issues last night to that shitty O line. They can run block but they cannot pass block for shit. As a result, the coaches aren't calling any long passes and Mike Wallace is mostly useless when Tannehill gets all of 3 seconds to pass the ball or get stuffed. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on November 01, 2013, 09:52:08 AM Their line is not better/worse then the types of lines the Pats have on occasion. It's just the phins dont know how to:
a) scramble their qb b) do a 3-step offense c) keep guys that could help them with a + b Sherman (the OC) has taken a veritable beatdown in SoFla over his ineptitude at coaching and calling this offense. Stubborn college-coach jackass is he; knows not how to properly use the pieces he has and takes way too long to adjust to a game. If the phins don't make the playoff he'll likely be fired. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 01, 2013, 10:02:39 AM Ahh Mike Sherman. I am well familiar with him from his days as the Packers' head coach. I actually blame him for almost ending Brett Favre's career early. He was also responsible for their first losing season since 1991 (4-12 in 2005). He had a terribly bad habit of getting a lead, then coming out in the 3rd quarter and his entire offensive plan was run on 1st and 2nd down, then when that didn't work, call a really shitty conservative play on 3rd down that usually failed. He'd spend the whole 3rd quarter on 3 and outs and when the opposing team came back, he'd have to rely on Favre to win the game late in the 4th. He also couldn't evaluate defensive talent worth a fuck, and spent much of his reign there drafting shitty cornerbacks like Ahmad Carroll who didn't understand what pass interference was or how to avoid it. He got them to the playoffs all but that last year on talent, especially Favre and Ahman Green's talent, but he was a terrible coach at adjustments. I was so glad to see the back of him.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 01, 2013, 10:10:16 AM If anybody watched that Seattle offensive line against the Rams, I don't think anybody could take them seriously as a super bowl winner right now. A lot of that is injury, but man, it was horrific. There were 7 sacks on Seattle in one game. SEVEN. Denver only has 11 all season. I have a hard time excusing injuries on a teams performance when you look at the crap the packers have had to handle and are still winning in convincing fashion. When all but one of our WR got broken we said fuck it lets do this running game thing and they did and its working well for them. Rodgers may only have one named WR but my god in that last game some of those passes. He threw a couple huge receptions that basically were an inch from the defenders ear hole. One of the commentators even mentioned that if you think a pass may be coming put your hand by your ear hole because that is probably where the ball is going to be coming. Well. Rodgers is arguably the best QB in the game right now. Wilson is... not. re: Jonathan Martin. It sounds like he broke a bit and sought out help for himself. Also, being bullied/hazed could be compounded with any emotional issues already present. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on November 01, 2013, 10:44:11 AM (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-3ddJXlkB76M/UnMW0tod_8I/AAAAAAAAACU/HkWHYwav2Jo/s400/giowow1.gif)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 01, 2013, 11:19:08 AM that needs some benny hill music.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on November 01, 2013, 11:41:06 AM Gio's the man
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 01, 2013, 01:13:48 PM Justin Blackmon suspended indefinitely. As someone on the internet said.
"In Justin Blackmon's defense, he plays for the Jaguars." Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 01, 2013, 01:35:25 PM It's not like he's going to make a lick of difference this year anyway. Shit, if I played for the Jags, I'd be on the drugs too.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on November 02, 2013, 09:47:35 AM Quote In the middle of a conversation that lasted 19 texts, Martin wrote the following to Incognito: "Yeah, I'm good man. It's insane bro, but just know I don't blame you guys at all. It's just the culture around football, and the locker room got to me a little." -J.Mart I know I'm being a bit obsessive about this story but it just really resonates with me because I too was a scholar football player; not anywhere near the level of this guy (could never gain enough weight), but still. In my situation, I had the benefit of being around most of my friends, who were also fairly smart. I'd say half of my team were gifted/honors (the geekpack was strong, we had all planned to play ball together since kindergarten). Martin's case was similar from K-postsecondary (culminating in being a Stanford grad.), he was always around ball players who could likely prove Riemann between possessions. Linemen are always the smartest on a team btw; the amount of meta that goes on in the trenches is never publicized though, sadly. Anyways, Martin gets to the NFL (where players tend to get dumb and dumberer; moreso in South Florida - the 2nd dumbest state in the union) and WHAM, reality check. Then he's had to anchor the left side of the line with Incognito; the league's version of "Ogre" from RotN. Never-you-mind the center (Pouncey) is also Aaron Rodriguez' best friend. The icing? A shitty coaching staff that takes advantage of his intellect by moving him around the line 3 times in one half-season (because they're too inept to sign proper position players) and making him bulk up as much as possible. It makes me sad. And reminds me somewhat of Ricky Williams and even a bit of Richard Sherman (out in Seattle). These guys rarely fit in, their minds suffer being around that environment too long, and the media labels them "emotional" or "socially challenged." It may seem 'wussy,' but seriously. Think of it a second... one minute you're drinking chai lattes in Menlo Park after a good semi-conductor doping lab, the next you're herp-derping it in Myjammy with Ogre and PitBull. Shit... I couldn't do it - I don't care how much they pay me. :why_so_serious: This shit is why I kept my little brother from playing ball, and he's the biggest kid in his school. Not because of risk of head injury, but because of the inherent intellectual reversal that happens from being around the game a long time. Eventually you wake up one day and you're like "damn, I'm way dumber then when I started." You're also 80% likely to go bankrupt and your body will be broken. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 02, 2013, 08:49:35 PM John Fox is set to miss 4-6 weeks to have heart surgery. Blergh.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on November 03, 2013, 01:26:43 PM Well... I am now convinced the JETS are completely unpredictable.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on November 03, 2013, 02:09:02 PM (http://sportsdata-corpsite-wordpress.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Brandon-Weeden-01.jpg)
Last man standing. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 03, 2013, 02:12:57 PM It's like the football gods are telling Cleveland "No, you drafted Weeden so you're going to damn well play him!"
In other news, how about those Bucs! :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 03, 2013, 03:41:33 PM Nick Foles. :ye_gods:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on November 03, 2013, 03:43:39 PM (http://img.pandawhale.com/66299-Mal-Reynolds-Firefly-speechles-iEFf.gif)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 03, 2013, 03:45:18 PM My wife has Peyton Manning in her fantasy league. She had no backup because Cutler got hurt. She decided it came down to Locker or Foles. She picked Locker. :facepalm:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 03, 2013, 04:35:50 PM I picked Locker too. :uhrr: Luckily, I only have to play him when Romo is on a bye.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on November 03, 2013, 04:42:57 PM I picked Locker too. :uhrr: Luckily, I only have to play him when Romo is on a bye. Foles has outscored 4 teams in the FF league so far. The hell Foles. Is he good? His bad game was when he got concussed right? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 03, 2013, 05:08:24 PM J-E-T-S JETS JETS JETS! :drill:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 03, 2013, 08:58:07 PM Foles isn't terrible, but he also isn't 7 TDs and perfect passer rating good. I do not understand this season.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on November 03, 2013, 10:59:00 PM To make things weirder... Richie Incognito has just now been suspended indefinitely for alleged player misconduct towards Jonathan Martin and JMart has filed formal allegations (and will likely now work to get a paycheck w/o playing). There are also now whispers of racial undertones and that JMart may have been the rumoured gay player on the team.
Philbin should be fired. Ineffective coach. Cowher slammed him yesterday morning too. What a joke of a franchise. :uhrr: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 03, 2013, 11:31:35 PM I picked Locker too. :uhrr: Luckily, I only have to play him when Romo is on a bye. Foles has outscored 4 teams in the FF league so far. The hell Foles. Is he good? His bad game was when he got concussed right? Well, yes. He's good. His production fell off toward the end of his tenure at Arizona, but he went from having Gronk to having no Gronk. The play calling at times during his college career was just fucking strange. Sonny Dykes alternates between super-mega-genius and drooling imbecile. His redzone efficiency was garbage (again, play calling) and he would at times airmail an easy one or toss a ball straight to the opposing team. But when in rhythm, he was really quite good. He did pretty well given everything (small receivers, Stoops, more Stoops). He's kind of like Chad Pennington, but taller and with a better arm. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on November 04, 2013, 12:36:49 AM The Browns beat the Ravens and the Steelers give up the most points since ever. :ye_gods: At least the Bucs managed to keep true to themselves.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on November 04, 2013, 01:48:26 AM Mike Glennon looked decent I thought.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on November 04, 2013, 10:13:23 AM Mike Glennon looked decent I thought. That was more the Seahawks fucking sleepwalking through the first half again. Shit is getting old. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 04, 2013, 10:41:51 AM Icognito suspended from team indefinitely, plus turns out to be a SWELL GUY (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/11/04/reports-incognito-left-racial-slur-death-threat-on-martins-voicemail/).
Quote Adam Schefter of ESPN reports that in April of 2013, Incognito left a voicemail for Martin saying, “Hey, wassup, you half n—– piece of [expletive] . . . I saw you on Twitter, you been training ten weeks. [I want to] [expletive] in your [expletive] mouth. [I'm going to] slap your [expletive] mouth. [I'm going to] slap your real mother across the face (laughter). [Expletive] you, you’re still a rookie. I’ll kill you.” Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 04, 2013, 10:44:40 AM I guess Tony Dungy had Incognito on a list they called DNDC which stands for Do Not Draft Character. Meaning he had character issues that they weren't willing to deal with.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 04, 2013, 10:46:40 AM He also perennially makes the "NFL's Dirtiest Players" list. Yup, super guy.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 04, 2013, 10:48:16 AM Irony.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjU5DsDl6TI Edit: Also, apparently the apple doesn't fall far from the tree (http://deadspin.com/is-richie-incognitos-dad-blasting-jonathan-martin-on-m-1457997230). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 04, 2013, 11:34:48 AM Sounds like a rodeo of crazy. They should fire everyone involved.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on November 04, 2013, 12:02:17 PM He's kind of like Chad Pennington, but taller and with a better arm. I hope not as seemingly-injury-prone, either. I don't know if that's just my faulty memory, but I seem to recall ol' Chad breaking in half a lot. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 04, 2013, 12:04:12 PM He's less athletic than Phil Simms. If he doesn't have a great line or a scheme to get rid of the ball with haste, he's going to end up with a lot of time on the sideline.
He had a minor knee issue one year, but other than that, nothing. At least he didn't end up like Willie Tuitama. That guy is at risk for concussion when he eats cereal. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 04, 2013, 12:04:53 PM Look, Pennington just had a dream of setting the record for "NFL Comeback Player of the Year" awards.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 04, 2013, 12:13:47 PM Pennington's shoulder was apparently made of tissue paper, and the socket was porcelain. Man's shoulder separated more times than Elizabeth Taylor's marriages.
As for Foles, against shitty defenses (Tampa and Oakland), he and that Eagles' offense appears godly. Against a competent defense (the Cowboys), he got a concussion and the offense sucked a line of goats. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 04, 2013, 12:36:57 PM On what basis would you judge Cowboys being a better defense than those other two? The stats are fairly similar, and I would probably personally take Oakland or Tampa over Dallas (aside from fantasy). Both Oakland and Tampa have less Points Against currently.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 04, 2013, 03:15:23 PM On what basis would you judge Cowboys being a better defense than those other two? The stats are fairly similar, and I would probably personally take Oakland or Tampa over Dallas (aside from fantasy). Both Oakland and Tampa have less Points Against currently. 5-4 vs. 0-7. :why_so_serious: The Cowboys have a decent front 7 and a backfield that occasionally shows up. Tampa has a dysfunctional locker room a staph infections. The Raiders are... the Raiders. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 04, 2013, 03:23:53 PM Raiders were a top 10 defense before yesterday, though.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 04, 2013, 03:46:42 PM Foles isn't terrible, but he also isn't 7 TDs and perfect passer rating good. I do not understand this season. One has to wonder if that was Foles' 'Matt Flynn' game. I was really hoping the Bucs would blow that lead they had and lose so Schiano would be fired today, but alas only one of those things happened. :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 04, 2013, 04:40:56 PM Raiders were a top 10 defense before yesterday, though. And then...they weren't. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ginaz on November 04, 2013, 04:50:34 PM Icognito suspended from team indefinitely, plus turns out to be a SWELL GUY (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/11/04/reports-incognito-left-racial-slur-death-threat-on-martins-voicemail/). Quote Adam Schefter of ESPN reports that in April of 2013, Incognito left a voicemail for Martin saying, “Hey, wassup, you half n—– piece of [expletive] . . . I saw you on Twitter, you been training ten weeks. [I want to] [expletive] in your [expletive] mouth. [I'm going to] slap your [expletive] mouth. [I'm going to] slap your real mother across the face (laughter). [Expletive] you, you’re still a rookie. I’ll kill you.” These days, if an NFL player told me "I'll kill you" I would be scared for my life, esp. since one of them is on trial for multiple murders. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 04, 2013, 07:35:43 PM Rodgers getting hurt? Yeah GB needed that. It ties the room together.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on November 04, 2013, 08:53:58 PM Irony. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjU5DsDl6TI Edit: Also, apparently the apple doesn't fall far from the tree (http://deadspin.com/is-richie-incognitos-dad-blasting-jonathan-martin-on-m-1457997230). A forum member (I've posted there before actually; and it's where I go for phins info.) sleuthed out his dad after some pretty suspicious posts. The old guy didnt even bother changing his screename from other sites - wasnt hard to smoke him out. Anyways, I personally think there's way more to this story then meets the eye. If what Incog's father said is true (Martin was a drug addict and 3-time suicide attempter) then that obviously changes everything. Regardless, the team seems to be sticking by Incognito and not Martin. That's telling. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on November 04, 2013, 09:57:48 PM If what Incog's father said is true (Martin was a drug addict and 3-time suicide attempter) then that obviously changes everything. Why?Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 04, 2013, 10:04:11 PM An old white man's idea of a drug addict is probably just someone that smokes some pot.
The accusations about Martin's life excuse nothing about Incognito's behavior, even if true. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 04, 2013, 10:41:11 PM Irony. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NjU5DsDl6TI Edit: Also, apparently the apple doesn't fall far from the tree (http://deadspin.com/is-richie-incognitos-dad-blasting-jonathan-martin-on-m-1457997230). A forum member (I've posted there before actually; and it's where I go for phins info.) sleuthed out his dad after some pretty suspicious posts. The old guy didnt even bother changing his screename from other sites - wasnt hard to smoke him out. Anyways, I personally think there's way more to this story then meets the eye. If what Incog's father said is true (Martin was a drug addict and 3-time suicide attempter) then that obviously changes everything. Regardless, the team seems to be sticking by Incognito and not Martin. That's telling. The link I provided discusses smoking him out. Also, I call BS on this "changing everything". Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on November 05, 2013, 12:46:39 AM Rodgers getting hurt? Yeah GB needed that. It ties the room together. On the way home from kendo practice, I was telling Ingmar how I was in pretty good shape in fantasy football this weekend, as I was down 25-ish points but I had three Packers to go while my opponent had no one playing tonight. And then I thought to myself, "Assuming none of them decide to get hurt in solidarity." Guess who one of my players was tonight? :why_so_serious: (still won, though) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 05, 2013, 07:26:18 AM Green Bay is fucked.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 05, 2013, 07:33:48 AM Not quite as fucked as they would have been in recent years, though. Lacy has been running really well.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on November 05, 2013, 07:36:45 AM Not quite as fucked as they would have been in recent years, though. Lacy has been running really well. He's not known for a stable health record. :( Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 05, 2013, 07:43:44 AM They are saying he will probably miss three weeks. They will lose all three.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 05, 2013, 07:47:36 AM Yep. They're fucked.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 05, 2013, 07:58:32 AM So does this mean we won't be able to discount double check for three weeks? :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 05, 2013, 08:36:34 AM Rodgers getting hurt? Yeah GB needed that. It ties the room together. Yep, forget top 10. If Seneca Wallace is our QB for the next 3 weeks or longer, we are FUCKED. Proper fucked. EDIT: Also, holy shit, but the Bears defense is fucking BAD. Terribad. Lucky for them Seneca Wallace can't throw for shit. Also lucky for them that Green Bay's secondary can't cover any-fucking-body. Our front 7 is pretty decent at stopping the run and stuff within 5 yards of the line of scrimmage, but if the ball gets past that level, we're going to get gashed for 20. Maybe if our 2 main pass rushers weren't fucking hurt again. Seriously, the Green Bay training staff needs to be fired. The amount of fitness injuries over the last few years has been astounding, especially knee and hamstring issues that continually flare up like Matthews. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 05, 2013, 08:51:27 AM I assume you're not blaming a knee/hamstring on Mathews current issue.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 05, 2013, 09:00:26 AM No, but there have been a number of guys on that team that have missed practice time or games because of hamstring issues. Matthews and Nelson both had issues with that last year and this, and there are a lot of knee injuries going on (which may partly be because of the NFL's attempt to get people to stop hitting the head).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on November 05, 2013, 09:16:13 AM I felt bad about getting excited when Rogers went down. I went in to that game expecting my Bears to lose by twenty. Backup vs. Backup made for a much better game.
You are correct about the Bears defense. In my fantasy league I dressed James Starks, even though he's running behind Lacy, just because I know how bad the Bears are up the middle right now. They were mediocre to start the year, and now are down Melton and Briggs. Not good. Good thing they can score. Tressman's got them running and gunning like they were the Allouettes, its fun. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 05, 2013, 09:39:24 AM It's amazing how good a Bears offense can be with guys like Marshall, Jeffries, and Forte when the QB actually has time to throw the fucking ball. The Bears O line is just light years beyond last year's model, both on the personnel front and the scheme front.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 05, 2013, 09:39:49 AM The Packers should give Favre a call. How great would that be?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 05, 2013, 09:42:12 AM It would be lovely, but he'd probably forget about the call 2 days after he signed the contract and never show up.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 05, 2013, 10:18:03 AM Flynn is available and I have to imagine someone they will try to grab off waivers.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 05, 2013, 10:19:39 AM Flynn has an elbow issue. I think that is unlikely. Word is they will promote Tolzien off the practice squad and probably just stick with Wallace.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 05, 2013, 10:20:14 AM Flynn has an elbow issue. I think that is unlikely. Word is they will promote Tolzien off the practice squad and probably just stick with Wallace. Ah, okay... didn't realize Flynn was injured. But.. jesus.. Wallace looked TERRIBLE. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: kaid on November 05, 2013, 10:55:04 AM Flynn is available and I have to imagine someone they will try to grab off waivers. This is pretty much what I am thinking. he knows the scheme well enough and has proven he can drive our offense effectivly in emergencies and is currently on wavers. lets get him back and punt wallace. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 05, 2013, 10:56:47 AM Flynn is available and I have to imagine someone they will try to grab off waivers. This is pretty much what I am thinking. he knows the scheme well enough and has proven he can drive our offense effectivly in emergencies and is currently on wavers. lets get him back and punt wallace. This. Elbow issue or not, I'm almost positive he couldn't do worse than Wallace. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 05, 2013, 10:58:17 AM Clearly.. the answer is...
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 05, 2013, 11:00:17 AM Fuck you. You shut your dirty whore mouth.
Also, thank the football gods it's not Vince Young. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 05, 2013, 11:26:49 AM It's too bad the trade deadline has past. I'm sure they could have swung a trade for Brandon Weeden. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 05, 2013, 11:38:39 AM (http://i.cdn.turner.com/sivault/si_online/covers/images/1987/0803_large.jpg)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on November 05, 2013, 01:03:05 PM http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9929515/aaron-rodgers-green-bay-packers-miss-three-weeks
Broken collar bone and only 3 weeks? lucky him. Mine was 6 weeks before I got full motion back without pain. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 05, 2013, 01:08:59 PM They're fucking dreaming if they think he'll be back and functional by 3 weeks.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 05, 2013, 01:16:38 PM It's apparently non surgical and fairly minor as things go. He wanted to suit up lats night and go back in.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 05, 2013, 01:24:08 PM Yeah, but a fracture is a fracture and healing time is pretty much 6 weeks. He might not cause more injury to himself, but I can't imagine he'd be at full capability.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 05, 2013, 01:36:58 PM So still better than Seneca Wallace? :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 05, 2013, 01:43:17 PM I'm not sure I've seen a more awkward throwing motion than what Seneca Wallace was offering last night. Yes, I am including Tim Tebow.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Velorath on November 05, 2013, 01:45:59 PM They are saying he will probably miss three weeks. They will lose all three. To be fair, in Weeks 11 and 12 they play the Giants and the Vikings. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 05, 2013, 01:54:37 PM I'm not sure I've seen a more awkward throwing motion than what Seneca Wallace was offering last night. Yes, I am including Tim Tebow. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UFA__ztkdP8 :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 05, 2013, 01:55:05 PM Yeah, but a fracture is a fracture and healing time is pretty much 6 weeks. He might not cause more injury to himself, but I can't imagine he'd be at full capability. He played with an injured shoulder before, plus the stuff i've seen from Docs related to this story say that if what the news is about a minor fracture, that that timeline is fine. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 05, 2013, 01:58:36 PM Non-throwing arm, too. I'm always a little surprised how fast people come back from collarbones.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on November 06, 2013, 09:46:32 AM If Wallace gets some practice reps, I think you will find he is perfectly serviceable. Not many QBs look good when they are running for their lives on every play after holding a clipboard for 2 seasons.
He definitely has a cannon for an arm. Probably told this story before, but before the Sonics left, my old roommate's girlfriend got some floor seats for us (2nd row basically under the basket...it was pretty cool). Seneca Wallace was sitting about 50 feet away, and Brock Huard (another ex-Seahawk QB) was 3 or 4 rows behind Seneca. During a timeout, they were shooting T-shirts into the crowd with an air cannon. They gave Huard one to throw, and he put it into the first row of the upper seats. They gave Seneca one to throw. He stood on the court (wearing a leather jacket!) and fired it into the very last row. The way to use him is like Seattle uses Wilson. He is undersized with a good arm, so get him moving and utilize his speed and mobility. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: JWIV on November 06, 2013, 06:35:18 PM Just to give a quick update on the Pickem League.
It's Haemish, and then a knife fight for second with the majority of people being one or two picks off from each other. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on November 06, 2013, 07:33:21 PM Just to give a quick update on the Pickem League. It's Haemish, and then a knife fight for second with the majority of people being one or two picks off from each other. Yeah fuck him... he hax. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 07, 2013, 08:31:42 AM I just wish I had money on those picks. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 07, 2013, 08:50:38 AM This whole Martin/Incognito/Dolphins thing is venturing into predictable territory. Circle the wagons. Nothing is amiss.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 07, 2013, 09:27:01 AM I'm quickly getting to the point of "avoid all Martin/Incognito stuff". It's just making me angry now. The conversation around it may make me angrier than the initial issues.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 07, 2013, 09:31:40 AM Yah, don't look at the comments either. They've shifted significantly, and certain groups have become rather emboldened where they weren't before. It's become a giant cesspit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2013, 09:53:13 AM I was on an audit earlier this week so I didn't get to do my power rankings.
Paelos Power Rankings Week 9: 1 - Denver 2 - KC 3 - Patriots 4 - Saints 5 - Seattle 6 - SF 7 - Indy 8 - Cincy 9 - Carolina 10 - JETS JETS JETS Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on November 07, 2013, 09:57:40 AM Patriots at 3 is ridiculous. Brady is among the most inaccurate QBs in the league this season, and their defense is decimated by injuries (Mayo, Willfork, etc). Every team below them on your list would at worst play them close, and most would kick their ass.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2013, 10:10:25 AM I don't like them there, but I also think with their schedule they go 11-5 minimum. It's just a cruise control into a high seed, and a possible bye if Denver stumbles in the latter half.
Also, they already beat the Saints heads up, so take that for what it's worth Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on November 07, 2013, 10:11:02 AM I've been listening to the endless Dolphins stuff on talk radio the last few days. Initially, I planned to ignore it, but all the recent commentary is pissing me off. There are a whole lot of people expressing opinions on this, that clearly have never been emotionally bullied in their lives.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2013, 10:15:57 AM It's totally shocking that people who follow the most overtly macho sport, which actively supports "playing through the pain" as a virtue, would have trouble with emotional security.
I mean honestly, who didn't see this coming? The only part I'm interested in is if the coaches called in a Code Red. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 07, 2013, 10:19:04 AM I don't like them there, but I also think with their schedule they go 11-5 minimum. It's just a cruise control into a high seed, and a possible bye if Denver stumbles in the latter half. Also, they already beat the Saints heads up, so take that for what it's worth The Chiefs would have to fall on their face too, for your theory to work. I don't disagree with the Chiefs falling on their face, but the race between Chiefs/Broncos is going to be tight. Week 11 and 13 are going to be crazy important. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2013, 10:19:55 AM Why? You get two byes.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 07, 2013, 10:48:59 AM Why? You get two byes. The two divisional leaders with the best records get the bye. They can't come from the same division. KC and Denver are in the same division. So if KC wins the AFC West, Denver would be a wild card. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 07, 2013, 10:58:17 AM Yep, the scrambling is actually going to be over which division leader gets fucked and has to host the AFC West wildcard team. Kind of true for the NFC as well, actually.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on November 07, 2013, 11:00:01 AM Yep, the scrambling is actually going to be over which division leader gets fucked and has to host the AFC West wildcard team. Kind of true for the NFC as well, actually. Yeah, which ever mongrel garbage team wins the NFC East will be a big home dog to Seattle or San Francisco. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2013, 11:25:06 AM If we can assume that Indy or Cincy isn't likely to go 12-4, I think the Pats are getting the bye regardless of Denver or KC, now that you mentioned it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 07, 2013, 11:33:05 AM If we can assume that Indy or Cincy isn't likely to go 12-4, I think the Pats are getting the bye regardless of Denver or KC, now that you mentioned it. It really doesn't matter what everyone else is doing. If KC wins the AFC West, Denver will not get a bye. Right now, Pats have the #2 seed. Denver has #5. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2013, 12:11:53 PM I think we're talking in circles here. I see your point that the AFC West is irrelevant in the bye situation.
That doesn't mean that it doesn't matter what happens with the other two division winners. They can certainly steal the bye from the Pats. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 07, 2013, 12:19:35 PM Who can steal the bye from the Pats?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on November 07, 2013, 12:25:17 PM The Bengals? :awesome_for_real: Actually it would be the Colts.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 07, 2013, 12:47:00 PM Man, fuck the Jets.
I would actually put the Pats below Indy on that list. Their defense is dogshit with all the injuries they've had and Brady is about the only thing holding that team together. The Pats team is one fractured collarbone from irrelevance. It doesn't hurt that the rest of the division is mediocrity flirting with the playoffs - and that includes the Jets. I would put one of the Bears/Lions/Packers/Chargers on that list before I'd put the Jets. Because seriously, fuck the Jets. This whole Martin/Incognito thing is disgusting. All these assgoblins coming out defending Incognito can suck it. That voicemail/text messaging with the racist slurs? No fucking excuse whatsoever. Most of the meathead ex-players on the sports channel really want to defend Incognito but know they can't because of the racial overtones so they are trying to walk this fine line between "shouldn't he have been able to handle it or just punched the guy?" kind of bullshit. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 07, 2013, 12:59:50 PM Remember they finally (probably) get Vereen back next week, so you'll be looking at a complete set of threats for Brady finally.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 07, 2013, 01:16:52 PM The Bengals? :awesome_for_real: Actually it would be the Colts. I could see the Colts over the Pats, but I think it will end up being the Pats. Because, Patriots. Baring Brady going down of course. Any of the elite teams are generally in the same situation that way. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on November 07, 2013, 01:25:54 PM Incog and JMart were pretty close friends (everyone has said as much). I've found pics of them hanging on Bourbon street together actually; their twitters are a bromance, etc. The issue with the 'code red' is simply the team wanting JMart to bulk up... something that was pretty much written into his contract, as he came in underperforming in the weight-room. Richie was just trying to drunk-dial rank on him for skipping the gym.
Conclusion after the latest info., Martin has a past that no one really wants leaking out and the team is paying the price for that silence (see: emotional issues alluded to). Since Martin still wants to play ball, this makes the situation worse. (it's not really a Ricky Williams type drama) He's more of a cornered rat at this point and will fight tooth-and-nail to either play ball again or recover as much payroll as possible + severance. I'd like to feel more for him, but the fact he saved personal voicemails between him and his "best" friend, only to use them publicly 6 months later (after laughing about it with peers in the locker room) is really just plain shitty. Having a particularly complex personal/professional relationship with your closest teammate doesn't excuse the matter. Above all of this... fact still remains that Stanford-like guys never truly fit into the dumbfactory that is the NFL (see Luck, Sherman, etc.). Never have, never will. Do teams need to do a better job incorporating intellect into the locker room though?? Hell yes. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 07, 2013, 01:31:11 PM Yeah, you're fucking nuts dude. There's no way these guys were BFFs. No fucking way.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on November 07, 2013, 01:35:11 PM You just don't understand bromances, obviously. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on November 07, 2013, 01:42:14 PM Yeah, you're fucking nuts dude. There's no way these guys were BFFs. No fucking way. Then maybe JMart really and truly looked at the team as purely a traditional business - wherein he felt pressured to bromance it up with his teammates even though he secretly despised them. :popcorn: I'm half hoping on Monday Night football the two of them run through the tunnel hand-in-hand with violins in the background and rose petals on the turf. No really. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on November 07, 2013, 01:45:07 PM Have you ever played high level southern-style American football btw? Unless you have, it's tough to have a truly informed opinion on the matter. I keep hearing variations on this argument, but I don't understand it. It seems to me to be essentially "Football is full of manchildren acting shitty to each other, therefore this instance of it is totally ok." Hell, even in Hockey - a sport for well off northerners - I never had many friends on my teams. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 07, 2013, 01:47:28 PM Yeah, you're fucking nuts dude. There's no way these guys were BFFs. No fucking way. BFF's in the standard sense that you're thinking of? No. BFFs in a football-sense? Yes. Have you ever played high level southern-style American football btw? Unless you have, it's tough to have a truly informed opinion on the matter. Only other things I can think of are JMart is gay, him and Richie were closer then anyone thought, or JMart really and truly looked at the team as purely a traditional business - wherein he felt pressured to bromance it up with his teammates even though he secretly despised them. :popcorn: I'm half hoping on Monday Night football the two of them run through the tunnel hand-in-hand with violins in the background and rose petals on the turf. No really. And there's just no possible way that Martin was going along with things to avoid conflict, none at all. Because that's totally not what people who get bullied often end up doing. Football is not some special magical world where the rules of normal human behavior fly out the window and everything is just totally alien to anyone on the outside. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 07, 2013, 01:52:55 PM Yeah, this fucking bullshit of "they were friends, so it's not right" and "he might be gay" is why I need to avoid the topic all together. It's so "blame the victim" and filled with terrible logic that it just pisses me off.
Keep in mind it was the fucking Dolphins who asked Dez Bryant before the draft if his mother had ever been a prostitute. That's the fucking culture in that clubhouse, and it's straight up deplorable. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on November 07, 2013, 01:57:00 PM Have you ever played high level southern-style American football btw? Unless you have, it's tough to have a truly informed opinion on the matter. I keep hearing variations on this argument, but I don't understand it. It seems to me to be essentially "Football is full of manchildren acting shitty to each other, therefore this instance of it is totally ok." Hell, even in Hockey - a sport for well off northerners - I never had many friends on my teams. Imagine the Sicilian from a Princess Bride being stuck in the ludus of Spartacus. That's kinda how it'd be for a Stanford pre-med grad born of Harvard stuck on a SoFla NFL team. If it doesn't make you dumber, it'd likely drive you insane. Yeah, you're fucking nuts dude. There's no way these guys were BFFs. No fucking way. BFF's in the standard sense that you're thinking of? No. BFFs in a football-sense? Yes. Have you ever played high level southern-style American football btw? Unless you have, it's tough to have a truly informed opinion on the matter. Only other things I can think of are JMart is gay, him and Richie were closer then anyone thought, or JMart really and truly looked at the team as purely a traditional business - wherein he felt pressured to bromance it up with his teammates even though he secretly despised them. :popcorn: I'm half hoping on Monday Night football the two of them run through the tunnel hand-in-hand with violins in the background and rose petals on the turf. No really. And there's just no possible way that Martin was going along with things to avoid conflict, none at all. Because that's totally not what people who get bullied often end up doing. Football is not some special magical world where the rules of normal human behavior fly out the window and everything is just totally alien to anyone on the outside. I've since edited my speculation. But I dare to disagree with you about football not being a "special world." I look at it as one might look at a platoon in a warzone. They dont live by the same rules and outsiders typically can never understand unless they've been there. So no, the rules of normal behavior actually do fly out the window to some extent and YES, it is in many ways totally alien. Like I said, I kept my brother out of the sport for these reasons. If this non-magical world you think football is was an actual reality, I would've let him play. I grew up around ball, played ball, and have quite many pro ball players that are close family friends (some with rings). I'm not talking out of my butt here. Yeah, this fucking bullshit of "they were friends, so it's not right" and "he might be gay" is why I need to avoid the topic all together. It's so "blame the victim" and filled with terrible logic that it just pisses me off. Keep in mind it was the fucking Dolphins who asked Dez Bryant before the draft if his mother had ever been a prostitute. That's the fucking culture in that clubhouse, and it's straight up deplorable. This I can agree with, except absolving Martin of any responsibility whatsoever. Life just isnt that black/white. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 07, 2013, 02:09:51 PM No, sorry, that's deterministic bullshit. Football does not have to be like that just because it has always been like that, any more than the FAMU Band has to have its culture of hazing or any fraternity does or anything else. Sports are not special. Fuck, the military is not special. Discipline is achievable without abuse.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2013, 02:13:28 PM No, sorry, that's deterministic bullshit. Football does not have to be like that just because it has always been like that, any more than the FAMU Band has to have its culture of hazing or any fraternity does or anything else. Sports are not special. Fuck, the military is not special. Discipline is achievable without abuse. It doesn't have to be, but it is. It's the biggest, macho dudes, loaded up with chemicals, and put together in a room. They don't talk about their feelings. They pretend not to have feelings. The second you show weakness, you're a target. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 07, 2013, 02:15:16 PM :facepalm:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2013, 02:18:59 PM You want to make the situation better? Strangle out the drug issues with continual testing and even harsher penalties, and start enforcing the hostile work environment laws we already have on the books.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on November 07, 2013, 02:21:09 PM No, sorry, that's deterministic bullshit. Football does not have to be like that just because it has always been like that, any more than the FAMU Band has to have its culture of hazing or any fraternity does or anything else. Sports are not special. Fuck, the military is not special. Discipline is achievable without abuse. It doesn't have to be, but it is. It's the biggest, macho dudes, loaded up with chemicals, and put together in a room. They don't talk about their feelings. They pretend not to have feelings. The second you show weakness, you're a target. That doesn't make it right, that doesn't make it acceptable, and that doesn't make it unchangeable. No one is really debating "is the culture really like this." They're debating if/how it needs to be changed. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on November 07, 2013, 02:22:14 PM Locker room dynamics vary by team. Rookie hazing rituals also vary by team. Just cause the Dolphins locker room is/was apparently dysfunctional doesn't mean all the other locker rooms are the same way.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 07, 2013, 02:24:02 PM Locker room dynamics vary by team. Rookie hazing rituals also vary by team. Just cause the Dolphins locker room is/was apparently dysfunctional doesn't mean all the other locker rooms are the same way. And it's clear there is something systemicly WRONG with the Dolphins organization. I'm beyond fucking annoyed that people are latching onto "hazing" or "bullying" for this topic, honestly. It's harassment, plain and simple. Mixed with some extortion, blackmail, fraud and theft. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2013, 02:26:11 PM Some parts of it you simply can't change. The NFL players with their salaries have become so far removed from regular society, and so famous, with the press absolutely hounding them at all times. It has created an "us against the world" mentality where the only sanctuary is the lockerroom at best. And if you can't become part of the collective there, or it's a toxic place to begin with? It's going to be ugly, just like what happened here.
There was something about Martin that a few guys didn't like, and the rest of them are now just going with the flow because it's another "us against the world" situation. Martin's now THEM. Hell, he might have always been THEM. You can't do anything about how people react to other people, other than cracking the lockerroom silence, and suing the shit out of the teams. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 07, 2013, 02:31:06 PM (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/82533/jeopardyfail.gif)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 07, 2013, 02:36:19 PM Keep in mind it was the fucking Dolphins who asked Dez Bryant before the draft if his mother had ever been a prostitute. That's the fucking culture in that clubhouse, and it's straight up deplorable. When Ireland did that it was a huge warning sign. He should have been fired right then. Scratch that, he never should have been hired. Worst thing Parcells ever did. Stephen Ross is also a terrible team owner, so that hasn't helped matters either. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2013, 02:38:49 PM They are going to end up firing a ton of people over this, make no mistake. I still don't think it will change the cultural stigma, or that Martin or Incognito will get a job again.
It's absolutely wrong that he can't do his job, but I believe Martin's best recourse now is to go after them in the courts and get as much recompense as he can. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on November 07, 2013, 02:43:00 PM The mob wants its Gladiators. Most of you will not get what you seek.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 07, 2013, 02:45:13 PM or that Martin or Incognito will get a job again. I can think of somewhere he could end up: http://www.mercurynews.com/49ers/ci_24466155/49ers-are-free-bullying-hazing-issues-says-donte Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 07, 2013, 02:46:53 PM Broncos could also use some Offensive Tackle depth. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Fordel on November 07, 2013, 03:03:53 PM Really, does any team turn down good linemen?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 07, 2013, 03:10:09 PM Dude, he's a pussy. Smart too.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on November 07, 2013, 03:29:02 PM Send him to Seattle. They are about to start Percy Harvin at tackle at this point. At least he could get entangled in a DE's legs and slow him down a bit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on November 07, 2013, 04:01:57 PM I. Just. I give up. :facepalm: At this point, every phins fan should be allocated paper-bags to wear over their heads. Philbin is done. Ireland and Aponte are done (hopefully). Good riddance.
http://www.local10.com/sports/aventura-police-dolphins-richie-incognito-harassed-golf-volunteer/-/1717082/22858256/-/11fm0jpz/-/index.html Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Velorath on November 07, 2013, 04:12:29 PM Naw man, what you don't get is that's just like the golf mentality man. You wouldn't understand it unless you played golf at a high level.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on November 07, 2013, 04:15:42 PM Since when is it news that Incognito is a fucking sociopath? He is been complete fucking asshole his entire career. Anyone surprised by any of this hasn't been paying any attention (his current employers absolutely included).
Pity this is going to derail the franchise for years. They have a decent core, and seemed to be getting close to relevant. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 07, 2013, 04:17:13 PM Naw man, what you don't get is that's just like the golf mentality man. You wouldn't understand it unless you played golf at a high level. :heart: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2013, 04:18:17 PM Really, does any team turn down good linemen? I don't think it will be up to the teams. Gooddell and the owners hate incidents that make the league look bad, right or wrong. They want nothing more than this thing to go away, and they will likely pay to do that. As I understand it, lawyers have already been unleashed on the situation. Maybe he gets another shot, but I'm always skeptical of the way NFL franchises work once you've been blackballed. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ginaz on November 07, 2013, 07:16:22 PM I watched a segment last weekend about this with Chris Carter and Keyshawn Johnson, both former NFL players who were pretty good. Both of them said this sort of thing is NOT normal in an NFL locker room and wouldn't have been tolerated on their teams. People defending the Dolphins and saying Martin is at fault here should really look at the guy being singled out, Richie Incognito. This guy has been a first class douche bag his entire life, not only on the field but off of it. I'm inclined to believe that this guy went way beyond the normal shit rookies get put through and abused whatever authority he was given as a veteran player. Why should Martin have to tolerate that?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2013, 08:06:59 PM Sort of funny that Chris or Keyshawn would be looked on as the voices of reason on anything.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 08, 2013, 07:15:32 AM Why's that? They seem to be functioning more as a sanity check here.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 08, 2013, 08:19:01 AM Just because of the general crazy they used to bring to the lockerroom themselves in the past. I mean Keyshawn and Gruden absolutely hated each other. It was so bad in the lockerroom that Key got deactivated and traded in 2003. This was like...a year after winning a Super Bowl?
And Chris? He was cut by Buddy Ryan for massive amounts of alcohol and drug abuse in his first stint with the Eagles. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 08, 2013, 09:00:12 AM Yah, so? How does that have anything to do with the topic at hand? I'm sure they were more than capable of knowing what went on with the other players in the locker room/practice field. They did frequent those areas.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Phildo on November 08, 2013, 09:09:14 AM ESPN just ran a story about this that might be worth discussing:
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/9941696/jonathan-martin-walked-twisted-world-led-incognito Quote Welcome to Incarceration Nation, where the mindset of the Miami Dolphins' locker room mirrors the mentality of a maximum-security prison yard and where a wide swath of America believes the nonviolent intellectual needs to adopt the tactics of the barbarian. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 08, 2013, 01:28:38 PM He makes solid points. Celebrating and circling the wagons around some white pyscho over the notion of being an "honorary black" is pretty much doing the work of white supremacists for them. Whitlock's point about Incognito being an honorary bigot hits home. He's right, the Miami lockerroom is absolutely crazy and ignorant for defending the guy, and yet they are.
Which sort of speaks to how fucked up the lockerroom "us against the world" mentality can get when it runs to this absurd length. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 08, 2013, 01:34:48 PM Incognito is probably one of those guys that is either all in or hates your guts. You're either on "his team" or you're the enemy. I have a suspicion that the guy isn't truly a racist. I think it would be tough to play in the NFL and be a true racist. I'm not bothered by his language, tbh, as I suspect that it wasn't too different from typical locker room lingo.
What is getting glossed over is that this guy seems to fit the typical "roid rage" psychological profile... Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 08, 2013, 01:54:48 PM I have a suspicion that the guy isn't truly a racist. I think it would be tough to play in the NFL and be a true racist. I'm not bothered by his language, tbh, as I suspect that it wasn't too different from typical locker room lingo. What is a "true racist"? Also, Riley Cooper says hi. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Khaldun on November 08, 2013, 07:02:34 PM Holy fuck.
All I can say is that this whole thing is really separating the men from the ridiculous bully-enabling football-is-full-of-special-flowers-you-don't-understand-locker-room-culture boys. http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9939308/richie-incognito-jonathan-martin-miami-dolphins-bullying-scandal Quoting Brian Phillips from that piece: "Because this — this idea that Jonathan Martin is a weakling for seeking emotional help — this is some room-temperature faux-macho alpha-pansy nonsense, and I am here to beat it bloody and leave it on the ground. Every writer who's spreading this around, directly or by implication; every player who's reaction-bragging about his own phenomenal hardness; every pundit in a square suit who's braying about the unwritten code of the locker room — every one of these guys should be ashamed of himself, and that's it, and it's not a complicated story." Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ginaz on November 08, 2013, 08:22:38 PM Holy fuck. All I can say is that this whole thing is really separating the men from the ridiculous bully-enabling football-is-full-of-special-flowers-you-don't-understand-locker-room-culture boys. http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/9939308/richie-incognito-jonathan-martin-miami-dolphins-bullying-scandal Quoting Brian Phillips from that piece: "Because this — this idea that Jonathan Martin is a weakling for seeking emotional help — this is some room-temperature faux-macho alpha-pansy nonsense, and I am here to beat it bloody and leave it on the ground. Every writer who's spreading this around, directly or by implication; every player who's reaction-bragging about his own phenomenal hardness; every pundit in a square suit who's braying about the unwritten code of the locker room — every one of these guys should be ashamed of himself, and that's it, and it's not a complicated story." I've been in the army for almost 20 years and I've never seen shit like this before. It wouldn't be tolerated. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 08, 2013, 08:54:49 PM I have a suspicion that the guy isn't truly a racist. I think it would be tough to play in the NFL and be a true racist. I'm not bothered by his language, tbh, as I suspect that it wasn't too different from typical locker room lingo. What is a "true racist"? Also, Riley Cooper says hi. I forgot about that douchebag. I don't know if it's worth turning this into a politics thread, but someone that is truly a racist would be someone that, you know, hates people of another ( or many other races). I just don't think it's that common in the NFL. I may be wrong, but these guys have to work together very closely and if it was common I would expect you'd see shit like Riley Cooper more often. This should be particularly true in rivalry situations. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 08, 2013, 10:04:30 PM But where do you draw the line of what constitutes a "true racist". To me, this whole idea is not a binary thing... that's what I'm getting at.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 08, 2013, 10:35:13 PM I think we can safely just say that Richie Incognito is a complete and utter asshole without getting into which degrees of asshole he aspires to.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 09, 2013, 06:48:42 AM I'm pretty sure that it is a binary thing.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on November 10, 2013, 12:13:02 PM I was on an audit earlier this week so I didn't get to do my power rankings. Paelos Power Rankings Week 9: 1 - Denver 2 - KC 3 - Patriots 4 - Saints 5 - Seattle 6 - SF 7 - Indy 8 - Cincy 9 - Carolina 10 - JETS JETS JETS :uhrr: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 10, 2013, 01:10:03 PM We debated if they should be higher earlier on. I remain firmly convinced that you have no clue which Indy is showing up, and they will lose to somebody really stupid in the playoffs because of that, possibly after beating someone they have no business beating.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Fordel on November 10, 2013, 01:10:57 PM So what was Buffalo's logic at the end of the game there? "Dammit we are going to score at least ONCE!" ?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 10, 2013, 01:16:00 PM Yes?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on November 10, 2013, 04:49:14 PM Another good weekend of football, not counting the wall to wall Incognito coverage.
Carolina/49ers-Damn Panthers you scary! They played a tough nose to nose game against the Niners. That's a good defense. A GOOD defense. Kapernick sacked five times! The Panthers did try to turn the ball over in the last two minutes. But winning in SF puts them on the map this season. Titans/Jags-Good lord Titans, you let the Jags beat you? At home? Hurt Locker hurt again. Jesus. With the collapse of the Texans I was hoping the Titans would step up and challenge Indy for the South. But nope. Pitiful. Cincy/Ravens-Cincy determined to let the North slip away. Cincy has the chance to pull away in the division but is blowing it. Lions/Bears-The Lions passed the test. They take of business and are sole owners of 1st place in the NFC North. Swept da Bears. With GB's woeful luck, the North is the Lions to lose. If Rogers makes it back in time for the Lions game that would be an awesome game to see. Seaducks/Failcons-Seattle got the memo and is taking care of business as well. Atlanta is circling the drain. I don't know if they or the Texans are the most shocking collapse. Lynch ran all over the Falcons. Rams/Colts-Wut? Colts are another team that can't win the games they are supposed to win. Thankfully for them, they are in the 'special' division this year. Bizarro. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 10, 2013, 05:32:26 PM The Broncos found a coach even more conservative than John Fox!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 11, 2013, 08:49:23 AM Holy shit, what a day of football.
Apparently nobody wants to win the AFC North. Cincy keeps blowing games they should win. They really should have won what with that miraculous comeback to get to OT. But... LOLBUNGLES. Fuck you, Jake Locker. Your vagina is going to be constantly sprained, especially on the day I start you over Romo because of such a favorable matchup in the FF league. Fuck you. You're lucky my opponent had Seneca Wallace at QB. And speaking of Wallace, fuck you too. SCOTT FUCKING TOLZIEN. This is what it's come to. Unless Matt Flynn's arm has completely fallen off, please Green Bay SIGN HIM. Also, please go to the Furniture Warehouse and sign somebody ANYBODY that can cover - I don't care if all they can cover is a fucking couch, it's got to be better than the shit show that is the Packers' secondary. HOLY BALLS. Indy. Just :ye_gods: What... the... fuck? At home against KELLEN GODDAMN CLEMONS? Not only can you not block for Luck, you give up 38 points? This team is schizo and will lose in the playoffs this year. Good thing their division is such a horror show. Yes, the Lions are now the team to beat in the NFC North. Good thing for the Pack that they really aren't a great team. Their defense is pretty terrible, mostly the secondary and they really had no business letting Chicago back into that game. They really were trying to lose it though. Two unnecessary roughness penalties in the last goddamn minute, both of which were REALLY STUPID PENALTIES? Letting Chicago get a chance at a 2-pt conversion TWICE because you can't control yourself? You ought to be benched, except you fit right in with that crew of idiots on the front 4. Chicago's defense is also still really bad and I'm surprised they only allowed 21 points. Cutler looked great for 5 minutes then he should have been pulled. They had no business playing him as long as they did. He clearly wasn't up to a full 4 quarters. San Diego is close to being a good team, but they have to find a way to finish drives. Manning barely had the ball in the first half and he still managed to get TD's whereas Rivers got field goals. Denver's defense needs to learn how to stop teams before they get inside the 20. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on November 11, 2013, 09:49:24 AM The AFC north is all going according to plan. The Browns will back into the playoffs this year!
Guess that T-Rich trade actually might work out for them. :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on November 11, 2013, 02:17:18 PM Holy shit, what a day of football. Yes, the Lions are now the team to beat in the NFC North. Good thing for the Pack that they really aren't a great team. Their defense is pretty terrible, mostly the secondary and they really had no business letting Chicago back into that game. They really were trying to lose it though. Two unnecessary roughness penalties in the last goddamn minute, both of which were REALLY STUPID PENALTIES? Letting Chicago get a chance at a 2-pt conversion TWICE because you can't control yourself? You ought to be benched, except you fit right in with that crew of idiots on the front 4. Chicago's defense is also still really bad and I'm surprised they only allowed 21 points. Cutler looked great for 5 minutes then he should have been pulled. They had no business playing him as long as they did. He clearly wasn't up to a full 4 quarters. I don't know how much Lions football you follow, but stupid personal fouls in close games is standard operating procedure. There's a reason Suh doesn't do Subway commercials anymore. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 11, 2013, 02:27:27 PM I don't know how much Lions football you follow, but stupid personal fouls in close games is standard operating procedure. There's a reason Suh doesn't do Subway commercials anymore. Oh, I'm well aware. It's what's probably going to keep them from going too deep in the playoffs. Well, that and the shitty secondary. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 11, 2013, 02:29:08 PM Power Ranking teams past 5 is becoming impossible with these injuries and bizarre losses.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 11, 2013, 02:32:15 PM The Jets have to be creeping back up there.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 11, 2013, 02:33:03 PM Power Ranking teams past 5 is becoming impossible with these injuries and bizarre losses. I'm not sure any ranking beyond Denver/KC/Seattle/New Orleans is much point these days. Any team with 2 losses besides the Saints is so inconsistent as to be impossible to predict. Also, I forget the numbers, but I read somewhere that the number of injuries is way up this year over the past year. Maybe it's partly because they are getting touchier about concussions and thus diagnosing everyone with mild dizziness as concussed, but I think an uptick in injuries is a good reason everyone is so inconsistent. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on November 11, 2013, 02:36:41 PM I don't know how much Lions football you follow, but stupid personal fouls in close games is standard operating procedure. There's a reason Suh doesn't do Subway commercials anymore. Oh, I'm well aware. It's what's probably going to keep them from going too deep in the playoffs. Well, that and the shitty secondary. I completely agree. I'm a Lions fan, but stomping other players for instance is completely out of bounds. There's a systematic lack of discipline in the organization. Maybe they think they are the 'Bad Boys of the NFL', but that lack of discipline will bite you in the ass in close games as we've seen. Or maybe it's because they've been losers for so long they don't know how to be a winning organization. Oh and ghost, fuck you. :grin: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Slayerik on November 12, 2013, 08:41:36 AM One thing I will say about the Lion's D is they put Cutler on his ass about 15 times. I'm not even sure if they got a sack, but they sure beat the crap out of the guy. Secondary is pretty abysmal, but their defense isn't terrible by any stretch. The first time ever they are sole owners of the division league. YOU GO GURRRRLL
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 12, 2013, 08:49:37 AM Paelos Week 10 Power Ratings:
1 - Denver 2 - KC 3 - Saints 4 - Seattle 5 - Patriots 6 - Carolina 7 - Detroit 8 - SF 9 - Jets 10 - Philly Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 12, 2013, 08:53:33 AM JETS! :heart:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 12, 2013, 09:37:21 AM Philly? Really? :uhrr: Believe it or not, I'd put Dallas ahead of Philly. Hell, I'd put Chicago, Cincy or even Indy ahead of Philly. I'd probably put most of those teams ahead of the Jets too because... LOL Jets, even though they are better than they have any right to be this year.
Miami utterly shit the bed and it's their own damn fault. Losing 2 starting O-lineman because one is a racist, bullying, misogynist douchebag really speaks to organizational dysfunction. What makes it LOL worthy is the fact they spent like $200 million on free agents and can't even beat a winless team. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 12, 2013, 09:43:31 AM Who would have thought that Jacksonville would have the best coaching staff out of the Florida teams? :facepalm:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 12, 2013, 09:45:58 AM Jonathan Martin.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on November 12, 2013, 10:07:58 AM Miami utterly shit the bed and it's their own damn fault. Losing 2 starting O-lineman because one is a racist, bullying, misogynist douchebag really speaks to organizational dysfunction. What makes it LOL worthy is the fact they spent like $200 million on free agents and can't even beat a winless team. What makes it funny is even with 10-days to prepare the coaching staff thinks it's cool to run their same old, predictable offense ("go-go!") whilst half their line is missing and the other half is underperforming... oh, and run the ball a lot too. There was no creativity or adjustment to their gameplan whatsoever. T-Hill scrambled exactly zero times as well; not even a rollout (when all year he'd been scorching defenses when he's on the move). Wallace looked like he pretty much gave up on the team altogether. Dont blame him really; even though he's paid $60m. It's the most stubborn and sophomoric coaching staff I've ever seen; they really show their inexperience. For me, the phins' troubles really boils down to a plethora of said crap rookie coaching staffs (since JJ left). The past two owners have not wanted to spend the money or relinquish control to a hardcore, proven veteran coach and the org. has paid the price since. It's folly. Especially when your front office has always been a laughing stock... like why would you even want them to stick their noses into anything? Nope, I expect Ross to finally eliminate the taint of Parcells' lackeys very soon... ending with minimally the OC losing his job, if not the HC as well. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 12, 2013, 10:25:17 AM Nothing with change until Ireland is fired. They really to sweep out everyone and hire someone with a proven track record, not one of these novices they keep trying to hire on the cheep. All that applies exactly the same in Tampa as well.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on November 12, 2013, 10:32:49 AM Part of the reason why guys like Harbaugh, Cowher, Gruden, and even Manning won't come to Miami is because the ownership was unwilling to part with his GM (Ireland). Indeed, that lies at the core of the issue here... Ireland is a Parcells guy (and some of the remaining taint that I spoke of that should be removed).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 12, 2013, 10:44:59 AM On Twitter yesterday Shannon Sharpe pointed out something interesting. Stephen Ross (Dolphins owner) was interviewed for Monday Night Football. During the interview Ireland's name was never brought up, he referred to everything as Philbin's. He thought that was very telling and that Ireland is for sure out at the end of the year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 12, 2013, 11:32:26 AM Philly? Really? :uhrr: Believe it or not, I'd put Dallas ahead of Philly. Hell, I'd put Chicago, Cincy or even Indy ahead of Philly. Here's why. They are the #1 rushing team in the league. They are tied with Seattle for the most road wins in the league. They've finally realized that Nick Foles is the starter and the current answer. They have a shot at winning the weakest division while also avoiding many injuries so far to their key players. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 12, 2013, 11:35:00 AM Yeah, it's funny that Kelly is dancing around the Mike Vick/Nick Foles question. I would hope that he likes his job enough to sit Vick firmly on the bench.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 12, 2013, 11:41:01 AM Also, if Sean Lee is out for any amount of time, the Dallas team will lose. I say this as a fan. He's the only thing keeping that defense remotely functional.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 12, 2013, 11:53:06 AM Yeah, it's funny that Kelly is dancing around the Mike Vick/Nick Foles question. I would hope that he likes his job enough to sit Vick firmly on the bench. "16 touchdowns, no interceptions," Kelly said rhetorically. "Why would we change?" I guess that's dancing since he didn't just say 'Foles is the starter for the rest of the year', but it still looks like an endorsement to me. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 12, 2013, 12:22:10 PM Sure, now he is, but the whole season he's been avoiding it even though the answer was clear right from the beginning. He hasn't been fooling anyone.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 12, 2013, 12:28:38 PM Miami utterly shit the bed and it's their own damn fault. Losing 2 starting O-lineman because one is a racist, bullying, misogynist douchebag really speaks to organizational dysfunction. What makes it LOL worthy is the fact they spent like $200 million on free agents and can't even beat a winless team. What makes it funny is even with 10-days to prepare the coaching staff thinks it's cool to run their same old, predictable offense ("go-go!") whilst half their line is missing and the other half is underperforming... oh, and run the ball a lot too. There was no creativity or adjustment to their gameplan whatsoever. As I've said before... Mike Fucking Sherman. Don't expect it to get any better at this point. He does not know HOW to adapt when shit isn't working. The fact that Daniel Thomas still has a job as a running back proves that, as well as the fact that both Hartline (possession guy) and Wallace (deep threat) have the same per catch average (12.4). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 12, 2013, 12:39:39 PM Wallace got put on Revis Island last night. It was pretty funny.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 12, 2013, 01:42:18 PM Sure, now he is, but the whole season he's been avoiding it even though the answer was clear right from the beginning. He hasn't been fooling anyone. I don't think it was clear right from the beginning at all. General opinion on Foles was not particularly high until those last couple games. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 12, 2013, 01:44:24 PM Don't forget the Dallas game, where Foles got rung up and tossed picks before getting pulled due to a concussion. At which point, Matt Barkley came in and developed color blindness so he couldn't tell when he was throwing to the Cowboys or his teammates.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 12, 2013, 02:14:01 PM That's not colorblindness. That's USCQBNFL Syndrome
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 12, 2013, 02:20:54 PM Sure, now he is, but the whole season he's been avoiding it even though the answer was clear right from the beginning. He hasn't been fooling anyone. I don't think it was clear right from the beginning at all. General opinion on Foles was not particularly high until those last couple games. What are you talking about? In his first game (when Vick got hurt) Foles threw for 200 yards and 2 TDs. In the next game he threw for 300 yards and 3 TDs. Then I believe that he got hurt and they put in Matt Barkley, who sucked monkey dicks. Mike Vick has thrown 5 TDs, has 3 INTs and 4 fumbles. He has also rushed for a touchdown, but he has generally sucked complete ass. Foles has been the right guy from day one. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Velorath on November 17, 2013, 12:21:48 PM Paelos Week 10 Power Ratings: 1 - Denver 2 - KC 3 - Saints 4 - Seattle 5 - Patriots 6 - Carolina 7 - Detroit 8 - SF 9 - Jets 10 - Philly Can we just start calling this the "Jets Kiss of Death Award"? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 17, 2013, 12:22:19 PM I do not understand this season.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 17, 2013, 12:32:13 PM Dear players, cut your hair.
https://twitter.com/Vincemarotta/status/402169474570129408/photo/ I do not understand this season. I love this season so much. edit: I CAN NOT DESCRIBE HOW MUCH I HATE COLLINSWORTH. Edit 2: (http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-D_uZLqsk9G0/Uomf_XwNVaI/AAAAAAAADtg/7uCBGiuCbXc/s1600/drfeelgood.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on November 18, 2013, 07:17:26 AM (http://i.imgur.com/XLu1WzB.gif)
:awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 18, 2013, 07:35:55 AM How is he not dead?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2013, 08:37:16 AM Philly is really making a case to be taken seriously in the NFC with Nick Foles at the helm.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 18, 2013, 08:46:48 AM And the Giants have won 4 in a row.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2013, 08:52:20 AM And the Giants have won 4 in a row. If they beat Dallas in the next week, I'll take them seriously. As it stands, they've beaten three teams with their backup QBs, and the Raiders. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 18, 2013, 08:54:43 AM So you're saying the Giants are just like the Chiefs?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2013, 08:57:43 AM Maybe, the biggest talking point of the Chiefs was they haven't played anybody worth a damn until now. They certainly looked pedestrian on offense against a Denver defense that's statistically below average.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 18, 2013, 09:05:06 AM "statistically" is the important word there. Stats are good for analysis to a degree. Denver's Run D has been top shelf all season, and we had garbage pass defense due to injury and... well, when you get the lead the teams have to abandon the run and go to the air (which does help the stats for the run D obviously too).
However, Chiefs have had the easiest SoS and faced backup QBs and third string QBs. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2013, 09:09:54 AM They still held Denver to their lowest point total of the year. The Chiefs defense is very good, their offense just wasted a lot of scoring opportunities. The game turned on that stupid fumble after the Chiefs had secured the first turnover of the game. Momentum was there and they blew it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 18, 2013, 09:21:30 AM I actually did not claim their defense wasn't very good. It is. We also held them to their lowest of the season. (Mind you, that total happened two others times this season.)
Denver was playing specifically conservative to protect Manning and his creeky ankles. That was the gameplan. When the Broncos scored, the Chiefs could not do much to stop them. The broncos early in the third went into clock management mode and just ground it down. They were playing January football. Chiefs have an adequate offense. They have a GREAT defense. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 18, 2013, 09:41:58 AM LOLNFCEAST. :awesome_for_real: The goddamn GIANTS are back in it. That's how shitty that division is. A team goes 0 and fucking 6 to start the season and is still in contention over halfway through the season. Yes, the Eagles are making a case for being taken somewhat seriously - but they are definitely feasting on an easy and lucky schedule. Green Bay without Rodgers. Two games against the Redskins. And this was their first win at home this season so maybe they are learning something.
The Niners/Saints game was pretty good. That penalty on the Brees hit which essentially lost San Fran the game is a close one. I can see it being called and I can certainly see it not getting called. Letter of the law, it's probably a penalty, though it sure didn't look like he was going for the neck/head area. There are just so many weird, Mickey Mouse "can't hit a guy here or when his body is like this" kind of exceptions to contact rules lately that it must drive defensive players NUTS. We're heading towards goddamn flag football. Also, San Francisco? They now have the same record as Arizona, whose defense is almost as good as San Fran's. And Carson Palmer may be playing better than Kap, whose receivers just cannot get open. Did anyone else's nuts retreat up into their body cavity when they saw the replay on the Jabari Greer injury? FUCK. LEGS ARE NOT MEANT TO BEND LIKE THAT. Packers - fuckity fuck fuck fuck. I guess I should be thanking my lucky stars it's not Vince Young there, but shit. Can no one but Aaron Rodgers throw TD's in a Packer's uni? Denver v. KC - this was the game I thought it would be. KC's defense is REALLY GOOD but it's hard to sack a guy when he gets the ball out of his hand so fucking fast. Peyton hardly ever had the ball longer than 2-3 seconds, sometimes a lot less. He got lucky on one throw that was almost a pick 6, and the Broncos got lucky again with that immediate turnover after their first fumble. But the Chiefs offense does not play from behind well. It's just not built that way. However, the disruption caused by the crowd in Denver is going to be reversed in KC, so their offense may function a bit better in 2 weeks time. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 18, 2013, 09:57:38 AM I think it will be, and I think the Chiefs have a really good chance at stealing that next game. I've thought for weeks we would split the series. Hopefully they lose to SD this week to help the tiebreaker. :P
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on November 18, 2013, 10:02:35 AM The Chiefs are a clock control team (good D and ground game). They will struggle against any team that can get a lead and hold it. I don't see them going deep into the playoffs for this reason.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on November 18, 2013, 11:21:34 AM The Chiefs are a clock control team (good D and ground game). They will struggle against any team that can get a lead and hold it. I don't see them going deep into the playoffs for this reason. Yeah well, Baltimore won the Superbowl last year, so any twisted thing that can happen, probably will. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 18, 2013, 11:25:43 AM I bet the Chiefs lose in the first round of the playoffs. They just have that shitty, great-in-the-beginning-of-the-season feel to them.
I can also see the Giants making a run like they did in their two Superbowl years. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on November 18, 2013, 11:52:58 AM (http://nesncom.files.wordpress.com/2013/11/wes-welker.gif?w=630&h=355)
Also Giants are still dead to me. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2013, 11:58:31 AM I like what the Panthers have been doing very quietly. Their defense is great and their offense is functional. If they can beat the Pats, and split the New Orleans series, they have a good shot at winning the NFC South.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 18, 2013, 12:20:19 PM I bet the Chiefs lose in the first round of the playoffs. They just have that shitty, great-in-the-beginning-of-the-season feel to them. In that equation do you see them not winning the AFC West and taking the first or second seed and a first round bye? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on November 18, 2013, 12:54:06 PM I bet the Chiefs lose in the first round of the playoffs. They just have that shitty, great-in-the-beginning-of-the-season feel to them. They are the type of team that could walk through the playoffs by winning a bunch of close exciting games. But they are also the type of team that might just lose a game because they couldn't score enough points and go out in an uneventful 24-10 type of game where it never really feels like they are in it. I think in this day and age of the NFL it's tough to rely so heavily on your defense. There's just too much that can go wrong, even if you're defense is playing great, particularly with the prolific offenses these days. Looking at last year's Playoff scores, the lowest winning score was 19, a few 24s, and after the wild card round the winning teams scored at least 28 in each game. I'm not sure I trust the Chiefs to put up those kind of numbers when push comes to shove. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 18, 2013, 01:02:09 PM I bet the Chiefs lose in the first round of the playoffs. They just have that shitty, great-in-the-beginning-of-the-season feel to them. They are the type of team that could walk through the playoffs by winning a bunch of close exciting games. But they are also the type of team that might just lose a game because they couldn't score enough points and go out in an uneventful 24-10 type of game where it never really feels like they are in it. I think in this day and age of the NFL it's tough to rely so heavily on your defense. There's just too much that can go wrong, even if you're defense is playing great, particularly with the prolific offenses these days. Looking at last year's Playoff scores, the lowest winning score was 19, a few 24s, and after the wild card round the winning teams scored at least 28 in each game. I'm not sure I trust the Chiefs to put up those kind of numbers when push comes to shove. Exactly. The days of playing old fashioned run the ball/good defense are done. You need to be able to score points, and more importantly need a good QB. The Packers without Rodgers are a completely different team because their margin for error is much smaller. Defense plays bad, that's ok because Rodgers might be able to still score enough points to win. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on November 18, 2013, 01:04:06 PM I think in this day and age of the NFL it's tough to rely so heavily on your defense. There's just too much that can go wrong, even if you're defense is playing great, particularly with the prolific offenses these days. Looking at last year's Playoff scores, the lowest winning score was 19, a few 24s, and after the wild card round the winning teams scored at least 28 in each game. I'm not sure I trust the Chiefs to put up those kind of numbers when push comes to shove. The NFL favors offense in every conceivable way. It's what the paying customer wants. If you want to win a Super Bowl with defense, you have to have such an overwhelming advantage at defense as to overcome the benefits of having a good offense. Seattle, SF, and KC will need to find more offense if they want to beat Indy, Den, or NO in the Super Bowl (conference exclusions apply). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 18, 2013, 01:04:39 PM We see dominating defenses win quite a bit, but generally at the end of the year it's when their offense gets hot and starts playing decent. The Chiefs are a house of cards. Just wait. They'll tank.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 18, 2013, 01:05:42 PM We see dominating defenses win quite a bit, but generally at the end of the year it's when their offense gets hot and starts playing decent. The Chiefs are a house of cards. Just wait. They'll tank. Seems like they at least started. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2013, 01:17:23 PM Defenses still win if you have a remote amount of balance on the offensive side. It's the teams that completely ignore their offense in favor of a defensive and running game that lose.
Also with the emergence of the new offensive rules and favoring high scores, defense is much more about takeaways, sacks, and red zone holds, than it is about yardage. It's about impact plays, not the plays between the 20s. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 18, 2013, 01:50:37 PM Defense does not win championships. Or at least it isn't nearly as important as offense. This article is from a while back but I think it applies:
http://www.nfl.com/features/freakonomics/episode-15 Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2013, 02:48:15 PM I'll point out again that I think nobody should use any numbers regarding the NFL that happened before the salary cap.
EDIT: Hell, I'd go as far as saying you can throw out any numbers from before 2004 when the "illegal contact" rules came into the league. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 18, 2013, 02:50:43 PM Or probably any numbers from before that snow playoff game between New England and Indy when Peyton Manning's receivers got mugged so bad by Belicheat's defense that they added extra pass interference rules the next season. That was really the beginning of the modern elite QB arena league era we are in now.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2013, 07:20:23 PM The refs are really bailing out the Patriots with calls. 4 first downs on penalties, and it's not even 5 minutes into the 3rd quarter.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on November 18, 2013, 08:19:01 PM Well, they made up for it with that holding call on the last drive.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2013, 08:34:30 PM Wild ending. Flag isn't a flag at the end.
Patriots got a ton of calls, then they didn't get enough at the end. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 18, 2013, 08:35:05 PM He was just giving Gronk a hug. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on November 18, 2013, 08:35:59 PM Wild ending. Flag isn't a flag at the end. And for once, it should have been. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on November 18, 2013, 08:49:42 PM That was uncatchable.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 18, 2013, 09:01:01 PM That was uncatchable. At the very LEAST it was holding, however the reason it was uncatchable was because he was being bear hugged and pushed back. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 18, 2013, 09:56:26 PM It's about time the Patriots have a call go against them. Am I the only one who has unbridled hatred for Belichick and Brady? I smile every time they lose.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: El Gallo on November 18, 2013, 10:06:59 PM Can't imagine any way Gronk catches that ball without curbstomping the guy who intercepted it (and had Gronk beaten like a rented mule before the other guy hugged him).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on November 18, 2013, 10:22:19 PM LOLNFCEAST. :awesome_for_real: The goddamn GIANTS are back in it. That's how shitty that division is. A team goes 0 and fucking 6 to start the season and is still in contention over halfway through the season. Yes, the Eagles are making a case for being taken somewhat seriously - but they are definitely feasting on an easy and lucky schedule. Green Bay without Rodgers. Two games against the Redskins. And this was their first win at home this season so maybe they are learning something. You have no idea how fucking hilarious I would find it if the Giants somehow managed to derp their way into the post season, but even though no one really wants to win the NFC East (you guys talking about how the Eagles are sort of making a case for themselves just jinxed them, GOOD JOB) (no seriously, good job, I fucking hate the Eagles), I certainly do not even kind of sort of expect such an amazingly dumb thing to happen. Because it would be dumb. So incredibly dumb. And hilarious. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sky on November 18, 2013, 10:59:09 PM Gronk turned, saw it was short, made to run back to it but couldn't because of McLovin's huggyarms.. Curb stomp or not, that flag should've stood and they should've gotten another shot. Patriots got robbed there.
That said, it was a great comeback, decent game, and the Pats fucked up several opportunities on the last drive and didn't really deserve to win anyway. Love the Brady F-bomb in the officials face the censor was a bit slow to nab. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on November 19, 2013, 05:15:13 AM That was uncatchable. At the very LEAST it was holding, however the reason it was uncatchable was because he was being bear hugged and pushed back. To me it looked like the ball was short. Holding, yeah, sure looked like that. Gronk was pushed back but it still looked short to me and I don't think even he could have run back to the line and caught it. Even if he wasn't in a slap-fight. But who knows? That's what is great/awful about football. Apparently Brady wasn't able to convince the refs to change their minds by arguing with them on the way to the showers. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on November 19, 2013, 05:22:50 AM If I was going to cover a receiver in the NFL right now I'd just do whatever, because there's apparently no way to know in advance if you're actually going to get called for anything, or alternatively called for nothing.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on November 19, 2013, 07:58:28 AM Put me in the camp that agrees with the refs. The only person who had a chance at that ball caught it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 19, 2013, 08:08:07 AM That play would have had pass interference called on it if it were in the first half of the game and probably the third quarter also. There is a definite difference in how plays are called with the game on the line.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 19, 2013, 08:44:06 AM That play would have had pass interference called on it if it were in the first half of the game and probably the third quarter also. There is a definite difference in how plays are called with the game on the line. Yep, and as a DB you know that. You can mug a guy on a hail mary play because the refs don't want to decide the game on a penalty that huge in a home stadium. I think the entire game was officiated poorly. The refs were flagging things they had no business flagging, and letting crap go that was egregious. The refs converted SIX third or fourth downs into first downs due to penalties. Finally, I think they all decided that if they let that call stand up for a road team, they were going to get reprimanded by the league. It was that bad all game. Both sides had big penalties for first downs for a total of 8 times. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 19, 2013, 09:04:25 AM Even if it wasn't Pass Interference (which I still argue is), it's Holding and still a missed penalty and really shitty officiating on a big stage for a big game on the final play. Total BS.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 19, 2013, 09:08:02 AM We can cry about officiating at the end of games, but it's the same across all sports. Refs will not make calls late that they make early. You've watched enough sports to know this as fact.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 19, 2013, 09:09:26 AM I didn't watch the game but I did see the hightlights of the play. I'm so glad they picked up that flag. Not because they should because... come on. That shit was pass interference or AT LEAST holding any day of the week. No, I'm glad they picked up the flag because FUCK NEW ENGLAND. Cheating assholes can go fuck themselves because again, Belicheat's DB's in that snow playoff game against Indy are the fucking reason we have the no touching on pass plays league where the defenders just have no concept of how to defend anybody because the rules are so fucking pedantic.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MuffinMan on November 19, 2013, 09:38:32 AM I made sure to keep watching for Belichick's press conference. It was awwwwkward. 30 seconds between few questions of him just standing there, staring.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l7OykATWIHI Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 19, 2013, 09:46:13 AM Is that different from normal?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 19, 2013, 09:55:31 AM We can cry about officiating at the end of games, but it's the same across all sports. Refs will not make calls late that they make early. You've watched enough sports to know this as fact. So, never talk about anything ever because it's stuff that just happens. Okay! gotcha. Message boards are going to be awfully boring from now on. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 19, 2013, 10:23:00 AM Don't be ridiculous. Also, you're defending an action that would benefit the Patriots, so I'm never going to agree with you on pure principle. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 19, 2013, 10:25:37 AM The funny thing about this is that the stance of "not wanting to alter the game" does not logically make sense. If the referees wanted to not alter the game, they would make the same calls at the same level that they did for the rest of the game. By taking inaction they are affecting the outcome of the game more than they would by calling the call the right way. It's stupid.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 19, 2013, 10:41:15 AM Don't be ridiculous. Also, you're defending an action that would benefit the Patriots, so I'm never going to agree with you on pure principle. :why_so_serious: I am a fucking Broncos fan, you think there is any love lost between me and the Patriots? But beyond any rivalry, I want a fair game (everyone does, obviously) and we're discussing a major penalty that was not called that possibly formed the outcome of a game. Saying "guys it happens all the time, why bother" is such a horeshit thing to say. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 19, 2013, 11:12:44 AM I'm loving the fact that the Pats are now 2 games behind in the race for the #1 seed now, and still have to play Denver next week. Of course their schedule after that is mostly mediocre to shitty so if they win against the Broncos, they have a good chance to be right back in it. Denver's schedule is a little bit trickier but not by much.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on November 19, 2013, 11:26:18 AM If the Pats beat Denver (next week or in the playoffs) it will be entirely because Denver gave the game away. NE just doesn't have the personnel to outplay the Broncos.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 19, 2013, 11:29:36 AM Oh hey, ESPN's Playoff Machine is up for this year now.
http://espn.go.com/nfl/playoffs/machine Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 19, 2013, 11:36:02 AM We can cry about officiating at the end of games, but it's the same across all sports. Refs will not make calls late that they make early. You've watched enough sports to know this as fact. Baseball doesn't have this problem! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Fordel on November 19, 2013, 12:21:35 PM Strike zone.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 19, 2013, 12:22:21 PM Yeah I was thinking that maybe should have been in green text.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 19, 2013, 12:50:40 PM The strike zone doesn't really change over the course of the game.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 19, 2013, 12:51:16 PM MLB is about to add replay for certain calls. Enjoy!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Fordel on November 19, 2013, 12:52:20 PM That's not what you said when I asked why they don't just use a robot to figure out balls and strikes!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on November 19, 2013, 12:54:35 PM MLB is about to add replay for certain calls. Enjoy! And it's a fine change - fair/foul and safe/out are an obvious place where replay will add value. I think what this will end up showing is they get the calls right about 95% of the time anyway. And more to the point what I meant when I said that baseball doesn't have this problem, I mean they don't have the problem of swallowing their whistles at the end of the game. MLB umpires are perfectly happy to let a game end on a balk, a called strike, or an interference call. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 19, 2013, 12:57:29 PM Sweet. Ten hour games. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 19, 2013, 01:14:46 PM Saying "guys it happens all the time, why bother" is such a horeshit thing to say. Reality sucks. I mean honestly, you want me to say you're right? You're right, it shouldn't be that way. But it's human nature, and refs aren't robots. It's not going to change in the NFL, NBA, or NHL. They swallow the whistles late. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 19, 2013, 01:29:01 PM You don't need to teach anyone here about "reality", that's my point.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 19, 2013, 01:31:46 PM I always view bad calls as things that are bound to happen. Any team that lets the game come down to one bad call should have executed better earlier in the game to not let that happen.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 19, 2013, 01:45:36 PM You don't need to teach anyone here about "reality", that's my point. He's a CPA. That's the only part of his job that he can enjoy. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 19, 2013, 01:48:10 PM Replay in most sports has eliminated a lot of the bad calls, too. We're down to arguing over the ones that are usually supremely subjective.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on November 19, 2013, 03:25:24 PM And now for something completely different...
NFL team logos reimagined as soccer team logos. (http://www.footballasfootball.com) I particularly like the Bills and the Seahawks. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 19, 2013, 03:29:22 PM No matter how you slice it, the Bengals have a shitty color scheme and graphic design.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 19, 2013, 03:32:52 PM The Falcons one is about a million times better than the current logo.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 19, 2013, 03:33:32 PM They're almost all better than the current logos.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 19, 2013, 03:42:06 PM The Tampa one belongs on a liquor bottle. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on November 19, 2013, 04:42:07 PM No matter how you slice it, the Bengals have a shitty color scheme and graphic design. See, I liked the Bengals one. The Giants one is pretty fugly ... although I tend to hate anything that puts way, way too much emphasis on the red part of the Giants uniform. They're Big Blue, goddammit, not Big Red. So maybe I'd like it better if it was at least on a field of blue or white instead of red. :P Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 20, 2013, 05:56:35 AM I've always hated orange and black as a team color scheme and I really, really hate the tiger print helmets. It just looks trashy to me, not clean like the Cowboys logo or the Giants logo (I'm talking actual, out on the field NFL logos, not these).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on November 20, 2013, 06:19:10 AM Replay in most sports has eliminated a lot of the bad calls, too. We're down to arguing over the ones that are usually supremely subjective. I look at it this way, if they had not picked up that flag I don't think very many people at all would have been arguing uncatchable. Uncatchable is usually like, he threw the ball 10 feet over everyone's head into the stands, not, he was 5 yards away and being interfered with. As for the logos, I don't really like the Giants one that much, but I could live with it! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2013, 06:25:33 AM The Cowboys one doesn't work for me, but that's because the Cowboys one we have now is too iconic for me to want a change.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 20, 2013, 06:33:15 AM The Cowboys logo was badass. Actually, most of them were very good.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Segoris on November 20, 2013, 07:17:26 AM While I'm not a fan of a lot of the logos now, I wouldn't want most of the ones on that link either. The Buffalo one would have worked better for STL with some minor adjustments, and the BAL one was cool, while the NYG and 49ers ones were the worst in the bunch
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2013, 07:50:20 AM Paelos Week 11 Power Rankings:
1 - Denver 2 - Seattle 3 - New Orleans 4 - KC 5 - Carolina 6 - Philly 7 - Pats 8 - Indy 9 - Cincy 10 - Detroit Basically anything after #5 is a crapshoot. There are a lot of 6-7 teams right now that I think are disasters if they face anybody real. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 20, 2013, 07:52:28 AM Philly is not higher than the Pats, no matter who is or isn't catching passes in New England. I'm not even sure they are better than Indy or Cincy or Detroit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on November 20, 2013, 08:28:30 AM The Payoff Machine is interesting. Id set to Offensive, the Chiefs lose their next 5 and the Charges take their playoff spot. If Defensive is selected, the Chiefs are the #1 seed. This isn't surprising but goes to show that it is WAY WAY too early for the Playoff Machine.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2013, 08:45:12 AM I don't buy the Patriots at all, but they are going to win their easy division and get to the playoffs. The Patriots have one good win, against the Saints, and even that was in NE. On the road, they would be ground into dust by New Orleans.
I don't buy Indy at all, but they will sleepwalk to a division title. Honestly, they have Houston AND Jacksonville in their division. It's like Christmas for them all year long. Yet, they have too many consistency problems and keep getting themselves into bad situations early. Against better teams, they will not be able to keep coming back. While they have two good wins (both at home), they have 3 baffling losses against teams that don't have winning records. I don't really buy Cincy, but they can get in the playoffs even if they lose 3 in a row. They are already talking about how their QB may not be the long term answer. Don't be fooled by the yards (remember the opponents too), look at Dalton's rating. Would you invest big money in Andy Dalton? With all the big named receiver talent, and good offensive line play, why is Cincy struggling to put away a terrible AFC North? They should be leading that dumpster fire by 5 games, and already clinched by now. I sort of buy Detroit, but only because of their offense. Their defense will kill them in the playoffs because it can't stop teams from putting up 30 points. And not even good teams, the Steelers just put up 37. I mean, what? How they hell do you let that happen? If you can't pass on the Lions this year, you should fire your QB and your receivers, because you are terrible. The reason I do buy Philly is they figured it out mid-season. They figured out the QB, they figured out the running game, and they figured out the defense. They have some tough games left against Detroit, Chicago, Arizona, and Dallas, but they get most of those at home. They also get a cupcake game against a Vikings team that can't find it's ass with both hands. If they can go 3-2? I think they win the East at 9-7. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 20, 2013, 09:11:59 AM I have McCoy on my fantasy team so trust me, Philly figured out the running game on day 1. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 20, 2013, 09:14:26 AM The Payoff Machine is interesting. Id set to Offensive, the Chiefs lose their next 5 and the Charges take their playoff spot. If Defensive is selected, the Chiefs are the #1 seed. This isn't surprising but goes to show that it is WAY WAY too early for the Playoff Machine. I dunno, that logic seems to work for the Chiefs/Chargers. The chargers have a better offense than the Chiefs. The Chiefs just have a much much better defense. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sky on November 20, 2013, 09:37:11 AM If the Pats beat Denver (next week or in the playoffs) it will be entirely because Denver gave the game away. NE just doesn't have the personnel to outplay the Broncos. One reason I like the Patriots is they have a great system that develops talent and can slot in a lot of personnel...but yeah. Too soon, too much./unpopularopinionpuffin Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 20, 2013, 09:41:15 AM I don't buy the Patriots at all, but they are going to win their easy division and get to the playoffs. The Patriots have one good win, against the Saints, and even that was in NE. On the road, they would be ground into dust by New Orleans. The reason I do buy Philly is they figured it out mid-season. They figured out the QB, they figured out the running game, and they figured out the defense. They have some tough games left against Detroit, Chicago, Arizona, and Dallas, but they get most of those at home. They also get a cupcake game against a Vikings team that can't find it's ass with both hands. If they can go 3-2? I think they win the East at 9-7. You ding the Pats for an easy division but don't factor that into the Eagles? /boggle This Eagles team is one head shot to Foles away from having MATT BARKLEY as their starting QB. And I'm not sold on Foles yet because of that Dallas game - he was TERRIBAD and Dallas' secondary is pretty not good. Against a good defense, Foles is going to get eaten alive. The difference between the Eagles and the Pats is Tom Brady. The Pats shouldn't have won that game in New Orleans except... Tom Brady. The Eagles only home win this season is against Washington - who is fucking terrible. I would probably agree with you about Cincy, and yes, Indy's consistency is an issue. But I'll take a team with Tom Brady or Matthew Stafford over Nick Foles any day of the week. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 20, 2013, 10:07:58 AM This Eagles team is one head shot to Foles away from having MATT BARKLEY as their starting QB. We need to stop using this as an argument for ANY team. Look at the Pack. Imagine what would happen with the Broncos. A lot of the top tier teams would immediately sink without their star QB. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2013, 11:26:39 AM You ding the Pats for an easy division but don't factor that into the Eagles? /boggle I ding the Pats because I believe if they played the Eagles on a neutral field, they'd lose. They have one of the worst running defenses in the league. Philly would pound them to pieces. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 20, 2013, 12:11:05 PM For what it's worth, NE has only given up four rushing TDs.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2013, 12:23:32 PM True, but they have allowed 70% TDs in the red zone in their last 3 games, and the major point about the running game is it keeps Tom Brady on the sidelines where he can't be Tom Brady. NE gives up tons of yardage on the ground, and that eats clock.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 20, 2013, 12:30:05 PM True, but they have allowed 70% TDs in the red zone in their last 3 games, and the major point about the running game is it keeps Tom Brady on the sidelines where he can't be Tom Brady. NE gives up tons of yardage on the ground, and that eats clock. If they're short runs. I'd be more trusting in that information when it comes to TOP. The amount of yards doesn't mean much without the context of Avg yards per play vs the NFL or Time of Possession. Philly isn't exactly a grind the clock type of rushing team. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2013, 12:38:21 PM Philly has the lowest time of possession in the league. They run everything fast since that's the offense, and they score fast. It's the one question I have about that style of team, can they adapt late into a 5 minute close out a game team?
NE is like 24th in TOP, and 24th in yards per run. They give up 4.3 a play. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on November 20, 2013, 02:20:29 PM I don't buy the Patriots at all, but they are going to win their easy division and get to the playoffs. The Patriots have one good win, against the Saints, and even that was in NE. On the road, they would be ground into dust by New Orleans. I don't buy Indy at all, but they will sleepwalk to a division title. Honestly, they have Houston AND Jacksonville in their division. It's like Christmas for them all year long. Yet, they have too many consistency problems and keep getting themselves into bad situations early. Against better teams, they will not be able to keep coming back. While they have two good wins (both at home), they have 3 baffling losses against teams that don't have winning records. I don't really buy Cincy, but they can get in the playoffs even if they lose 3 in a row. They are already talking about how their QB may not be the long term answer. Don't be fooled by the yards (remember the opponents too), look at Dalton's rating. Would you invest big money in Andy Dalton? With all the big named receiver talent, and good offensive line play, why is Cincy struggling to put away a terrible AFC North? They should be leading that dumpster fire by 5 games, and already clinched by now. I sort of buy Detroit, but only because of their offense. Their defense will kill them in the playoffs because it can't stop teams from putting up 30 points. And not even good teams, the Steelers just put up 37. I mean, what? How they hell do you let that happen? If you can't pass on the Lions this year, you should fire your QB and your receivers, because you are terrible. The reason I do buy Philly is they figured it out mid-season. They figured out the QB, they figured out the running game, and they figured out the defense. They have some tough games left against Detroit, Chicago, Arizona, and Dallas, but they get most of those at home. They also get a cupcake game against a Vikings team that can't find it's ass with both hands. If they can go 3-2? I think they win the East at 9-7. I agree with all of this except Philly. The sample size on Foles isn't enough yet for me to jump on his bandwagon. They do stand an excellent chance of winning what is probably the worst division in the league right now. Like you said, they have three or four tough teams to play yet. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on November 20, 2013, 02:24:11 PM I agree with all of this except Philly. The sample size on Foles isn't enough yet for me to jump on his bandwagon. They do stand an excellent chance of winning what is probably the worst division in the league right now. Like you said, they have three or four tough teams to play yet. The AFC North is on line 2, they'd like a word with you. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 24, 2013, 11:57:55 AM If Houston loses to Jacksonville in Houston, they should be investigated for throwing the football game.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 24, 2013, 12:15:45 PM I always thought it was just the NFC East that was awful. I was wrong. The NFC North is just as bad. Christian Ponder looked like Joe Montana today.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 24, 2013, 12:31:09 PM I think this entire season is awful tbh. So many key injuries to teams, and several QBs going through the sophomore slumps.
We have basically two great teams. Seattle and Denver. Then you have a second tier of teams that are good but flawed in several places, like KC, Carolina, and the Saints. Then you have this utter mismash of crap that will win divisions because they are so awful: Indy, the Patriots, and Cincy. The rest is just ugly football with one team that will probably emerge in 3 weeks. What makes it even funnier to me is that I can see Denver and Seattle easily losing in the first playoff game they play. They have one part of their game that's exploitable. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 24, 2013, 01:11:10 PM I swear to God, Schiano better not be saving his job. :angryfist:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on November 24, 2013, 01:26:42 PM The Panthers winning seven in a row is pretty impressive. They had a tough win over Miami just now. The Panthers are a gritty, tough team.
Meanwhile Detroit loses to TB. At home. Jesus. Why didn't they keep it on the ground and kick a FG if needed? FFS. Lions are the Jets of the NFC; great one week, shit the next. The league-worst passing defense may have something to do with it. GB going to win the North with a janitor behind the center. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on November 24, 2013, 01:43:43 PM If Houston loses to Jacksonville in Houston, they should be investigated for throwing the football game. Seriously that was so so so horrible. I feel bad for Watt. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 24, 2013, 02:01:25 PM GB going to win the North with a janitor behind the center. Not so fast! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 24, 2013, 02:10:14 PM Yeah, we got Flynn but we aren't going any-fucking-where until Rodgers gets back. The talent level on defense, specifically the defensive backfield is just not there yet. The Packers can't cover ANYBODY.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 24, 2013, 06:23:09 PM HOW BOUT DEM COWBOYS!
PS - That stache looks ridiculous Eli. PPS - Suck it Giants. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on November 24, 2013, 08:07:41 PM Denver: : WHAT ARE YOU DOING? :ye_gods:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 24, 2013, 08:08:09 PM I'm pretty sure Tom Brady and/or Belichick have sold their souls to the devil.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 24, 2013, 08:12:24 PM It all started with that Ball fumble, which just goes to show they need to stop giving the ball to the guy who fumbles every week. And I'm not just saying that since I have Moreno on my Fantasy team. (http://fc05.deviantart.net/fs32/f/2008/204/2/f/Shifty_Eyes_Emoticon_by_Canaan1.gif)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 24, 2013, 08:20:34 PM Remember the injury to DRC? Yeah, that's what happened. We lost him, shifted personnel, lost Big Vick. Meanwhile Patriots made their adjustments.
Also, Manning is ... not playing well. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on November 24, 2013, 08:31:04 PM He's had nothing on the ball all night. It really became apparent once Brady got hot and started throwing darts. Of course, it hasn't helped that the Patriot DBs have been manhandling the Denver receivers all night.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 24, 2013, 09:03:41 PM They aren't calling anything on passes. It's a free for all boys. Get your licks on route 66.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on November 24, 2013, 09:38:13 PM unf unf unf (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY0WxgSXdEE)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 24, 2013, 09:53:05 PM Who's going to shit the bed completely? Find out next week in almost every NFL game we broadcast!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on November 25, 2013, 03:51:26 AM Superbowl 2013 - Hell no we won't go.
Doesnt the AFC have like 4 teams at 5-6 who are tied for the last spot in the playoffs? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on November 25, 2013, 05:02:48 AM (http://i.imgur.com/N5XcgzS.png)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on November 25, 2013, 06:04:16 AM Remember the injury to DRC? Yeah, that's what happened. We lost him, shifted personnel, lost Big Vick. Meanwhile Patriots made their adjustments. Also, Manning is ... not playing well. As soon as Brady came out at half time and lined up I told my wife "We're losing this one." Every opportunity except the very first one Manning had to do something it was just....bad. Cold Weather Manning + Major Injury. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on November 25, 2013, 06:11:28 AM It all started with that Ball fumble, which just goes to show they need to stop giving the ball to the guy who fumbles every week. You'll need to be more specific. I think one halftime adjustment was a Patriot thug call to some referee's family. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 25, 2013, 08:50:17 AM Eh, there were some bad calls that went in the Broncos favor as well. That ref bias bullshit is startin to drive me insane.
Ball only had one fumble, so I'm not sure what you need more specifics about. Honestly as bad as Manning was, the receivers also dropped a lot of balls. Nobody on the broncos were ready for a cold game apparently. That being said, it's not like we lost to the Jags or something. It was the Pats. I'm bummed, but I'm not goin to feel bad about the loss. The possible injuries (Moreno, DRC, Vickerson, Bruton) hurt though. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 25, 2013, 09:18:36 AM It wasn't just Broncos' receivers that were dropping balls all night. EVERYBODY was dropping balls. It just so happened that the Denver drops were in the second half when they needed to not drop the fucking ball. And I don't think it was ref bias so much as just shitty, unclear inconsistent rules for pass coverage that favor the offense but are called so inconsistently from week to week and sometimes play to play that it's almost impossible to tell what will get called on any given play. And what's making it worse is that receivers KNOW that shit. They are starting to become as bad as soccer forwards with the "simulation."
Also, fuck Houston and Detroit. You lost to the goddamn Jags and Tampa respectively. JUST FUCK YOU. You should be ashamed. Houston shitting the bed this year is just insane. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on November 25, 2013, 09:52:16 AM November 25th 2012
Atlanta Falcons 10-1 first place in NFC Houston Texans 10-1 first place in AFC November 25th 2013 Atlanta Falcons 2-9 last place in NFC Houston Texans 2-9 last place in AFC Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on November 25, 2013, 11:38:16 AM And I don't think it was ref bias so much as just shitty, unclear inconsistent rules for pass coverage that favor the offense but are called so inconsistently from week to week and sometimes play to play that it's almost impossible to tell what will get called on any given play. And what's making it worse is that receivers KNOW that shit. They are starting to become as bad as soccer forwards with the "simulation." This. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on November 25, 2013, 12:06:47 PM I was thinking about fumbles outside The Game we are talking about. Lots of drops also, and it looked like many people were trying to catch with flippers because their fingers were not working.
What's up with Holliday? Is he seeing spiders on the football? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 25, 2013, 12:59:33 PM Holliday has ALWAYS been like that. He muffed two punts the first game he played for us last year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on November 25, 2013, 01:44:58 PM Sounds like spiders to me!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on November 26, 2013, 06:07:07 AM Watch this and tell me it's not spiders.
(http://cdn.fansided.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/229/files/2013/11/Punt.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on November 26, 2013, 02:08:15 PM Took his eyes off the ball, saw 18 about to hit him, panicked.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on November 26, 2013, 02:15:41 PM Not catching the ball was probably the right move. He just should have made that decision much earlier.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 26, 2013, 03:54:14 PM It just stings that we had TWO of those. Him and Wes Welker both. January football is looking terrifying at the moment. :ye_gods:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 26, 2013, 03:58:23 PM If the Pats can pull out a bye, I think they can win the Super Bowl since it will be freezing cold in NY. I think the craziness of the NFL and the cold weather thing is really going to be a factor this year more than any other year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on November 26, 2013, 04:49:14 PM Since the Giants shouldn't be in the Superbowl the Pats should be ok.
Still dont think they'll make the SB though. Defense is cruddy. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 26, 2013, 06:19:53 PM Yeah, I don't believe in the Pats as contenders. Their biggest wins this year (Den and NO) were both kind of fluke wins.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on November 26, 2013, 06:29:12 PM It just stings that we had TWO of those. Him and Wes Welker both. January football is looking terrifying at the moment. :ye_gods: Preeeeeeety sure Welker is still on the NE payroll. If you know what I'm saying. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 26, 2013, 06:30:36 PM I didn't buy the Patriots before. Now I'm just confused by the NFL in general so they are back in the mix.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 26, 2013, 09:02:43 PM There was nothing flukish about their solid play in that second half.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: El Gallo on November 27, 2013, 05:55:49 AM Using a left-footed punter guarantees two muffs per game minimum. Ask Chris Collinsworth.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 27, 2013, 08:51:07 AM You don't have to ask him. He'll tell you... over and over and over and over and over and over.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 27, 2013, 08:51:19 AM There was nothing flukish about their solid play in that second half. First half they couldn't get their hands on the ball - 24 points against. Second half you couldn't get the ball out of their hands while Denver had spider bites. The turnovers shifting that dramatically is very flukish. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on November 27, 2013, 09:35:39 AM Spiders are awesome. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on November 27, 2013, 09:49:17 AM There was nothing flukish about their solid play in that second half. First half they couldn't get their hands on the ball - 24 points against. Second half you couldn't get the ball out of their hands while Denver had spider bites. The turnovers shifting that dramatically is very flukish. That component of it, sure. But Patriots played great, as could be seen from that come back. That's all I'm saying. It was flukish that those turnovers happened ion those first few possessions. Them playing as well as they did was not. I give all that props to the coaching staff and Brady. Let's be fair, even when we HAD the ball in the first half, our offense didn't look GREAT. Our Defense sure did. The injury to DRC was HUGE. Thankfully it sounds like he should be fine to play this week, as will Julius Thomas. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on November 27, 2013, 05:26:27 PM Worst part of that game is now once again I have to listen to Patriots fans rave about how good Tom Brady is.
Fuck that shit. Fuck Tom Brady. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on November 27, 2013, 06:12:46 PM (http://cdn.rsvlts.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/tom-brady-stetson4.jpeg)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 27, 2013, 06:26:07 PM (http://media.masslive.com/my_wide_world/photo/9088628-large.jpg)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on November 27, 2013, 06:39:21 PM (http://www.quickmeme.com/img/a8/a81460a5afde3b84df06eb5aa002810e534942d7ae8a060cfc30a2898588f23a.jpg)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 27, 2013, 06:49:15 PM Yeah from what, a decade ago? Hell, even Eli has two at this point.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on November 27, 2013, 07:00:25 PM :heart:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on November 28, 2013, 04:55:56 AM They give one of those rings away every year. Meh.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 28, 2013, 10:56:34 AM Joe Flacco having one does tarnish that shine a bit. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on November 28, 2013, 11:57:21 AM Brady gets a lot of hate for a lot of reasons both good and bad, but he is a fucking GREAT quarterback. I would take him over Peyton Manning any day of the week. It is no coincidence that he almost always beats Peyton. He quietly relishes the challenge of going against his nemesis, and I guarantee you that Peyton HATES it.
Also, Eli earned the shit out of his rings. While I would rather build a team around the elder Manning, Manning the Lesser is actually a much better quarterback when the pressure is dialed up to 1000. It is surprisingly easy to get Peyton out of his comfort zone, which is exactly why he seems to play poorly in the playoffs. The concerns that people are raising about Peyton playing a bunch of cold weather games over the remainder of the year are equally valid. Did you see those lame ducks he was throwing? They better hope Knowshown can run for 200 every week. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 28, 2013, 12:16:01 PM The Packers backfield really can't cover shit except by accident. And apparently Aaron Rodgers is a defensive coach, because since they've lost Rodgers, they forgot how the fuck to tackle as well. If the Lions weren't so good at turning the ball over, this game would be so over (well, more than it already is).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on November 28, 2013, 04:04:40 PM Oh it's finally a good Thanksgiving for this Lions fan! 40-10, over 500 offensive yards. Crazy. It sure didn't look like a blowout early on with two quick Lions turnovers. The Packers looked horrible frankly, that's not them at all. You can't blame AR being gone for a poor defensive showing. Seven sacks on Flynn. Nothing much good I can say about the Packers in this game. Maybe 10 days off will help them.
This game doesn't change my concerns with the Lions though. They are turnover machines and their secondary is almost complete trash. Of course I hope they win the Super Bowl, but realistically I don't see much of a chance of that. Turnovers KILL you against good teams. Hell even average teams. Then you have stupid personal foul penalties adding to the mix. But today is a day of giving thanks that the good Lions team showed up. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on November 29, 2013, 12:06:26 AM You can't blame AR being gone for a poor defensive showing. Seven sacks on Flynn. Nothing much good I can say about the Packers in this game. Yeah, this. Their defense has just turned to utter shit. I mean, their secondary has been bad from game 1 but the tackling reminded me of how bad they were in that playoff game last year against San Francisco. It just seems like when the opposing offense finds something that works, the Packers' defensive coaches NEVER adjust anything to fix it. If they aren't playing with a lead, they are utterly unable to cope. The offense though... the passing game apparently scares NOBODY, so they are just stacking the box and shutting the running game down. Flynn looked lost when he wasn't running for his fucking life. But that's not just Flynn, it's been every QB they've put in. The Packers are the absolute perfect example of the elite QB. He's so good, he makes an average team into a contender. He makes up for a bad O line and he hides the deficiencies in the defense by not making the defense have to work that hard. But as I said before, Rodgers being gone is no excuse for the defense to play as bad as they did today. The Cowboys won but it was hardly convincing. Good news for Cowboys' fans - they were able to close a game with a lead out by pounding the rock over and over. Oakland just couldn't stop the running game at all. McGloin didn't look bad at all - but that team has very little talent at wideout. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 29, 2013, 07:08:03 AM HOW BOUT DEM COWBOYS! :drill:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on November 29, 2013, 12:33:45 PM HOW BOUT DEM COWBOYS! :drill: Woohoo! They managed to beat one of the worst teams in the AFC!Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: naum on November 30, 2013, 06:26:33 PM It's been 2 days since the Steeler v. Raven game, and I'm still amazed in the aftermath -- how Bell got creamed with a vicious Jimmy Smith helmet to helmet hit that knocked his helmet off, and had the added bonus of freezing time in midair and erasing a TD. The NFL says it's a valid hit (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/11/30/smiths-hit-on-bell-wasnt-a-violation-of-new-helmet-rule/) so I guess the message is you can't hit QB or WR but it's always open season on RB (and linemen). Not only that, but if you do lay the helmet, you can even stop forward progress in midair like a cartoon. Total fucking clownshoes.
Oh, can't find a good video stream but here's a page w/animated gif that captures the play: http://www.sportsgrid.com/nfl/this-brutal-head-to-head-hit-wipes-away-levon-bell-touchdown/ Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on November 30, 2013, 06:40:55 PM That tackler led with his helmet like it was going out of style. :ye_gods:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 30, 2013, 06:48:58 PM The NFL specifically said it wouldn't count RBs when they made the rule because they lower their head on almost every run.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sir T on November 30, 2013, 06:51:27 PM Looking at it, the helmet did its job my absorbing the energy of the blow by coming off like that. So its possible that the guy was knocked out by his bare head hitting the ground. But I'd go on the opinion of someone more experienced at reading these things than I am.
But that tackle was WAY out of any civilized line. The guy lowered his head as he came in and deliberately rammed into the other guy with his head with his full body weight concentrated into his head. It went into the tackled guys neck and shoulder, which is why the helmet came off as it was pushed up from below. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 30, 2013, 06:55:23 PM The NFL is not civilized.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on November 30, 2013, 06:57:16 PM Honestly, at the speed these guys play at and the arms race of muscle mass we've seen over the last 20 years in the league, I don't even really blame them for violent hits. It's part of the game and you'll never remove all of it. But then, that's the real problem here. You can legislate all you want, but the problem is that the game is at base violent. Toss on the recent advancements in neurology that let us actually understand the damage the violence is causing and it's easy to see where this is going. But then, we have a thread for this discussion already.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sir T on November 30, 2013, 06:58:47 PM Yeah. thats a good point I suppose. If the guy had kept his head up he could have risked a broken neck.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on November 30, 2013, 07:14:35 PM I honestly think people would calm the fuck down with the 'pink dress NLF' talk if the refs would be consistent with calls across all games and all quarters. That is not happening and that is really what is being called out here.
As for that specific play, that was a crown of the helmet hit and should have been a penalty. IMHO. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on November 30, 2013, 07:29:29 PM They've charged the refs with making new impossibly subjective calls at high speed since 2004. I can't blame the officials for not being able to mete out justice in this case.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: naum on November 30, 2013, 08:51:44 PM They've charged the refs with making new impossibly subjective calls at high speed since 2004. I can't blame the officials for not being able to mete out justice in this case. ^^THIS Game, especially at professional level, is way too fast for on the field calls. But that doesn't stop the league and officials from issuing penalties (and often, penalty fines later, even if there was not an infraction called on the actual play) when there is helmet on helmet or even helmet first hits. It's impossible to judge intent though there are players with rap sheets of dirty hits (like Raven's Smith and former Steeler Harrison). But the silliness over that was especially the rollback of the TD -- yeah I understand the safety about stopping the play once the helmet comes off. But at least give the ball carrier his forward momentum to the ground. And gobsmacked at the league statement the next days -- Bell's helmet just didn't come off, he got speared. If that's Tom Brady running the ball I guarantee there's a flag and fine. I guess a RB is just supposed to put his head down and batter his way through himself. I suppose helmets are preferable armor/weapons, just don't wield them against QB or WR. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on November 30, 2013, 09:18:01 PM The NFL specifically said it wouldn't count RBs when they made the rule because they lower their head on almost every run. Within the tackle box the rule doesn't apply which is the part for RBs (and their tacklers). Outside the tackle box the rule does apply. However it has 3 parts to it and the part about lining up an opponent didn't apply in this situation so there's no penalty.You can watch the 2013 rule change video to see this explained: http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-videos/0ap2000000227096/2013-NFL-rule-changes Jump forward to 00:01:35 to see the entire section of leading with the crown on the helmet rule changes. As for the where the ball should be spotted when the helmet comes off it's way too complicated to allow the ball to be spotted further down field in certain circumstances. It's also much too dangerous as it would encourage players to try and extend the play after the helmet comes off if they know that there's a chance the ball will be spotted further down field. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 01, 2013, 06:09:02 AM The helmet off rule is the Jason Witten rule. If you remember he rumbled like 25 yards with his helmet off until he was knocked stupid on the sidelines.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 01, 2013, 12:54:44 PM Where are the Jets in the power rankings after this week?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 01, 2013, 04:01:42 PM Where are the Jets in the power rankings after this week? Cleaning the bathrooms. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Fordel on December 01, 2013, 04:19:20 PM Are you sure they can find the toilets? :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on December 01, 2013, 05:51:16 PM The defense can. The offense is in the wrong goddamn state.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on December 01, 2013, 08:32:38 PM The end of the Giants-Skins was totally bush league. I say that as a Giants fan, mind you.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on December 01, 2013, 08:36:18 PM I can't stand Washington and I still think it was total BS at the end.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 01, 2013, 09:48:47 PM Are the replacement refs still in? If that were the case like last year, everyone would have called for their heads. I heard in the post game that Shanahan asked for a measurement and the official told him he didn't need one (meaning it was a first down). Apparently they changed their minds after the Skins ran a play?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Zetleft on December 02, 2013, 02:11:24 AM (http://i.imgur.com/jbNlmX3.jpg)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 02, 2013, 09:40:15 AM There are lots of LOL's to be handed out. Bears, Browns, you guys deserve to be laughed at for losing to teams like the Jags and Minnesota. Hell, even Green Bay with no defense and Matt Flynn at QB got a tie with the Vikings. Also, Buffalo because Atlanta should not win another game. And the Jets just because.
The only weekend game I watched was the Denver/KC game and it was a good game. I keep hearing people talk about how great Peyton Manning is playing but if you look at his 2 first quarter INT's, those balls were floaters. I think he is having issues with arm fatigue because his arm strength is not consistent. KC's offense looked a lot better but it's clear Denver's D is not the same as it was last year. However, KC should be worried about how many long bombs they got torched on because it was a lot more than it should have been. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 02, 2013, 10:52:52 AM The only weekend game I watched was the Denver/KC game and it was a good game. I keep hearing people talk about how great Peyton Manning is playing but if you look at his 2 first quarter INT's, those balls were floaters. I think he is having issues with arm fatigue because his arm strength is not consistent. KC's offense looked a lot better but it's clear Denver's D is not the same as it was last year. However, KC should be worried about how many long bombs they got torched on because it was a lot more than it should have been. I disagree on the first of those two passes. The second one was a floater, but that first one was the Defense stymieing the receiver. Given how right on he was most of the game, I'll chalk it up mostly to "well, whoops". And, one again, DRC is out. That was a huge blow. Also, I think Von Miller putting on more meat has slowed him down. It's also time to send Bailey to the farm or to Safety. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: veredus on December 02, 2013, 09:27:07 PM Go Hawks! :heart:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on December 03, 2013, 01:39:30 AM Wow. At this point, can anyone seriously argue that RG3 or Luck are better QBs than Wilson? I don't think it's even close. Luck may have more upside, but I think right now he is way behind Russel in just about every way that matters. RG3 isn't what he was last year, and I suspect he never will be again. And while faster when 100% (which he is not right now), he is a less effective runner. His scrambles seem to come up short more often than not, while Russel's are like daggers in the heart - he seems to either get the first down, or end up pulling up and burning you with his arm. Far better situational runner, and right now he is far more elusive as well. I'm also not sure there is any better thrower from the scramble or bootleg in the NFL, and he is super dangerous when throwing back against the grain. He just absolutely tore the shit out of a top 5 defense.
Interested in what other people think. I might pick a lot of other QBs for a Fantasy team, but there are maybe only 2 or 3 I'd take if I was starting an actual football team. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on December 03, 2013, 06:26:18 AM However, KC should be worried about how many long bombs they got torched on because it was a lot more than it should have been. I really like the Adjusted Net Yards per Pass Attempt (http://www.steelersdepot.com/2013/12/2013-nfl-week-13-stats-adjusted-net-yards-per-passing-attempt-differential/) and looking at it you clearly see that KC made the most out of their last place schedule and will be more limping into the playoffs than burst in there. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 03, 2013, 06:28:29 AM No, Russell is having a breakout year.
However, for all the people that want to say it's a Broncos-Seahawks Super Bowl, remember that's not how it usually works out in the playoffs. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on December 03, 2013, 07:04:14 AM No, Russell is having a breakout year. However, for all the people that want to say it's a Broncos-Seahawks Super Bowl, remember that's not how it usually works out in the playoffs. Do SEA have home field advantage yet on the way to the Bowl? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Stewie on December 03, 2013, 07:06:15 AM If I was starting a football team I'd take Luck. I think most people would do the same.
That being said I'd be thilled to have Wilson. He just has that "it" factor and generally seems to have his shit together. I'd would also like to point out that Tannehill is quietly having a decent sophmore campaign. More yds, completions, tds and a better passer rating that Luck so far this year and he is sporting an all time bad o-line. I think long term when people look back on this class it will be these 3 that stand out and really I think all 3 are a good option to start a team. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 03, 2013, 07:45:19 AM No, Russell is having a breakout year. However, for all the people that want to say it's a Broncos-Seahawks Super Bowl, remember that's not how it usually works out in the playoffs. Do SEA have home field advantage yet on the way to the Bowl? No, 3 more wins would put it away. 2 more wins likely does it with any combination of one loss by other teams. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on December 03, 2013, 08:53:07 AM No, Russell is having a breakout year. However, for all the people that want to say it's a Broncos-Seahawks Super Bowl, remember that's not how it usually works out in the playoffs. Do SEA have home field advantage yet on the way to the Bowl? No, 3 more wins would put it away. 2 more wins likely does it with any combination of one loss by other teams. They looked incredible last night. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 03, 2013, 10:43:38 AM Seattle's an odd team. They are great at home. They are getting stronger late. They will likely clinch in the next two weeks.
Here's the thing, the Seahawks will eventually have to play away, even if it's just in NY in the Super Bowl. I'm not sure they can win outside the confines of the home stadium. The past certainly points to that. Since 2000, the Seahawks are 1-6 when they have to go on the road in the playoffs. Also let's remember the 2011 Green Bay Packers, who went 15-1 with only a single loss on the road. They fell in their first playoff game to the Giants. The 13-3 Falcons who lost to the Niners in 2012, and the Packers in 2010. The last one to get there and win was the 13-3 Saints in 2009. It was also 60 degrees that day in Miami when he played. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 03, 2013, 11:06:20 AM Paelos Week 13 Power Rankings:
1 - Seattle 2 - Carolina 3 - Denver 4 - Patriots 5 - New Orleans 6 - San Fran 7 - Philly 8 - Dallas 9 - KC 10 - Indy Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 03, 2013, 12:18:20 PM Wow. At this point, can anyone seriously argue that RG3 or Luck are better QBs than Wilson? I don't think it's even close. Luck may have more upside, but I think right now he is way behind Russel in just about every way that matters. You also forget that Wilson has hands down the best team of the three. Luck's defense is inconsistent, now that Reggie Wayne is out for the season he's having to rely on a young T.Y. Hilton and a guy in Heyward-Bey that couldn't hold onto the ball enough to even stay on OAKLAND'S team. RGIII has a SHITTY team around him on almost every level, but his problem is that injury which he is clearly NOT recovered from. That's not to knock Wilson but just based on the team's they play on, I'd still put Wilson behind Luck. Wilson has Beast Mode, decent wideouts (even though his two best will probably never play on the same field again for very long) and a defense that is just STIFLING at home and not bad on the road. EDIT: As to your power rankings - Carolina has feasted on an easy schedule, KC is a better team than Dallas (mainly their defense - which held Manning to less than 40 points at home and less than 30 on the road) and #10 might as well be "Insert Team Here." Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 03, 2013, 12:35:29 PM Carolina has beaten SF and New Orleans. We'll see if they can take the Saints at home (I'm guessing no). But if they do, they control the NFC South and possibly a bye.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 03, 2013, 12:37:31 PM Yeah well Indy has beaten, oh, Seattle, San Francisco, and Denver and yet you have them at #10.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 03, 2013, 12:43:33 PM Surely you don't take his power ranking lists seriously.... :ye_gods:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 03, 2013, 12:56:11 PM Yeah well Indy has beaten, oh, Seattle, San Francisco, and Denver and yet you have them at #10. I don't like Indy with the eye test. They are really inconsistent and lose to garbage teams at times, or get into dogfights with below average teams. Also, they aren't playing well late and are 3-2 after the bye week in a bad division. Carolina is on an 8 win streak. I should have said they beat SF and the Pats. They still have two left with New Orleans. http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/ranking/strength-of-schedule-by-team Carolina's schedule is tougher than people think. Along with New Orleans it's one of the tougher ones by that metric. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 03, 2013, 01:02:08 PM Carolina has beaten SF and New Orleans. We'll see if they can take the Saints at home (I'm guessing no). But if they do, they control the NFC South and possibly a bye. Carolina hasn't played New Orleans yet. They play at New Orleans this weekend, and at home in two weeks. We'll see if they are as good as all that then. I'm not saying they are bad, but San Fran and New England are the two best teams they've beaten this year. Both of these teams have some exploitable weaknesses. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 03, 2013, 01:04:27 PM Every team has exploitable weaknesses. And it's clear NO does. :D Carolina deserves that spot, imo.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 03, 2013, 02:12:15 PM Paelos Week 13 Power Rankings: 1 - Seattle 2 - Carolina 3 - Denver 4 - Patriots 5 - New Orleans 6 - San Fran 7 - Philly 8 - Dallas 9 - KC 10 - Indy Detroit beat Dallas and are leading their division and they still don't crack the top 10? :cry: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 03, 2013, 02:14:53 PM Detroit lost to Tampa at home. I can't really get over that one.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on December 03, 2013, 03:26:13 PM He also is a Cowboys fan :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 03, 2013, 05:10:25 PM Maybe that too. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on December 03, 2013, 11:27:29 PM Wow. At this point, can anyone seriously argue that RG3 or Luck are better QBs than Wilson? I don't think it's even close. Luck may have more upside, but I think right now he is way behind Russel in just about every way that matters. You also forget that Wilson has hands down the best team of the three. Luck's defense is inconsistent, now that Reggie Wayne is out for the season he's having to rely on a young T.Y. Hilton and a guy in Heyward-Bey that couldn't hold onto the ball enough to even stay on OAKLAND'S team. RGIII has a SHITTY team around him on almost every level, but his problem is that injury which he is clearly NOT recovered from. That's not to knock Wilson but just based on the team's they play on, I'd still put Wilson behind Luck. Wilson has Beast Mode, decent wideouts (even though his two best will probably never play on the same field again for very long) and a defense that is just STIFLING at home and not bad on the road. EDIT: As to your power rankings - Carolina has feasted on an easy schedule, KC is a better team than Dallas (mainly their defense - which held Manning to less than 40 points at home and less than 30 on the road) and #10 might as well be "Insert Team Here." No, I am not discounting the teams they are on. To be fair, I have only see Luck play I think twice, but I was pretty underwhelmed. He makes some terrible decisions sometimes. His numbers bear this out to a degree, but it isn't all about numbers. I have seen a lot of RG3 and a lot of Wilson, on the other hand. RG3 is constantly making bad choices and bonehead plays. If I had to lay down money right now, I would bet he will never be an elite QB. Wilson makes very few bad decisions. It is actually uncanny. You literally never hear the commentators say things like "rookie mistake" or "that's what you get with these young players". No talk about how he will develop into a great QB given time - because he plays like he is one already. He is extremely fun to watch. Luck may end up being the better QB in the long run, but Wilson is waaaaaaaaay better right now, in my opinion. Not close. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 04, 2013, 06:19:07 AM Luck is going through the typical adjustment period where the league has a year of film
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 04, 2013, 06:27:02 AM I keep waiting for that to happen with Wilson, but it hasn't happened yet. That may say something about how good he can be. I also think that it really said something about how talented he is when he left NC State to go to Wisconsin and absolutely tore it up. It's difficult to just step into a new system and pick it up and be the best in the country.
Regarding Luck, I think he's going to be just fine. I think people tend to forget just how shitty that team was without a decent quarterback. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 04, 2013, 06:29:52 AM Case in point, even with the adjustment, Indy will win the division
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on December 04, 2013, 06:34:09 AM Yeah, the same argument could be made for Wilson...they had a year of tape on him too, but it hasn't made a difference. And it isn't like Luck lit up the league last year anyway, he was towards the middle/bottom of the QB pack. Russel has been at the top of the list both of his first two years. Another thing that is clear about Wilson is he is a Big Game player. When the spotlight is on him, he absolutely tears shit up. I wonder what his numbers for nationally televised games looks like.
Ninja edit: Indy was never as bad as that one season made them out to be. They had lost Peyton, and had a real stinker to replace him. They mailed it in for the whole season. Their turnaround has been more due to coaching than to Andrew Luck. I will say this, though: he seems to have that 4th quarter comeback thing down pat. But he's needed it, because he tends to absolutely stink up the first three quarters. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 04, 2013, 06:43:07 AM It sounds as if you just don't like him personally and that is biasing your opinion of his play.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on December 04, 2013, 06:46:45 AM No, I am mostly kidding. I do think the hype has been a bit much. At the end of the day, as of right now, he is a middling QB at best, and that is being generous. His potential means exactly jack and shit until it is fulfilled.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 04, 2013, 06:55:44 AM For a rookie he did very well. And he's doing well this year. He's still a top 1/3 quarterback.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on December 04, 2013, 07:15:49 AM Top third? Curious how you measure that one, because I don't think there is much to back that up.
I agree that he is doing "well", but that's about it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 04, 2013, 07:19:41 AM His QBR is 13.
His DYAR is 14. His WPA is 9. I'd put him at about 10-11 on the NFL QB power rankings list. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 04, 2013, 08:28:16 AM Yeah, the same argument could be made for Wilson...they had a year of tape on him too, but it hasn't made a difference. And it isn't like Luck lit up the league last year anyway, he was towards the middle/bottom of the QB pack. Russel has been at the top of the list both of his first two years. Another thing that is clear about Wilson is he is a Big Game player. When the spotlight is on him, he absolutely tears shit up. I really think you are discounting the team Wilson is on way too much. Seattle's defense has been ELITE the last two years. Indy's defense has shown flashes of competence at best. The amount of time these two guys spend playing behind in the score counts a great deal for how well they do in the passing game. Also, Wilson has always had a top 10 running offense - Indy's best back over Luck's two years has been Donald Brown. Just this season, Luck has throw over 100 more passes than Wilson, last year Luck threw almost 300 more passes. That means Luck was constantly either trying to make up for their defense giving up points and being put in more 3rd and long situations than Wilson. Pure numbers - yes, Wilson is the better QB and the stats reflect that. However, I think it also shows that a lot of Indy's success has been the smoke and mirrors of good coaching as well as Luck's ability. Wilson is in a better situation that puts a lot less pressure on him to win ballgames, since he can always just hand it off to Beast Mode or get points from the special teams/defense. Whereas if Luck has a bad day, Indy has nothing behind him to back him up. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 05, 2013, 07:00:29 PM Jacksonville is playing Houston on Thursday Night Football.
In unrelated news, the guy who did the scheduling at the beginning of the season is now a greeter at Walmart. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 06, 2013, 07:02:23 AM I don't know, I watched the whole game and didn't think it was that bad. Everyone was looking forward to Seattle-New Orleans and that game was a stinker.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 06, 2013, 07:05:10 AM People actually like and follow New Orleans though. Nobody gives a shit about Jacksonville or Houston, even if they're good.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2013, 07:18:59 AM It was literally the worst match up you could have in the NFL by record and point differential.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 06, 2013, 07:39:14 AM And in inherent "give a shit" about the teams.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 06, 2013, 07:39:30 AM And Houston keeps pole position on next year's first round draft pick, which will be a QB I'm sure will do nothing but disappoint. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 06, 2013, 07:40:19 AM I'm going to recommend that they draft Johnny Football.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on December 06, 2013, 08:25:56 AM Clowney and Watt.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 06, 2013, 08:52:18 AM Sounds like Kubiak is on the way out today.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2013, 08:55:44 AM Sounds like Kubiak is on the way out today. Good, he needs to focus on not dying. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 06, 2013, 09:05:17 AM Using "health concerns" as the reason is just about the best PR side step you can do.
Hopefully he takes the rest of the yea off, and then when Adam Gase gets picked for a HC someplace else, we can welcome Kubs back into the fold as our new OC. Yup, presser under way. Kubiak out, Wade Phillips interim HC. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 06, 2013, 09:30:43 AM Wade Phillips will take them places.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 06, 2013, 09:35:10 AM Yeah, all the way to the Golden Corral lunch buffet.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2013, 10:10:52 AM Wade Phillips. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 06, 2013, 11:11:12 AM The Cowboys wish they had Wade Phillips back.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2013, 11:15:01 AM No we don't.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 06, 2013, 11:19:03 AM Yes, you do :awesome_for_real:
The two best Cowboys seasons in the last 18 years (!) were coached by Wade Phillips. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2013, 11:38:37 AM Did we win a Super Bowl? No?
That's all we care about. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 06, 2013, 11:45:19 AM The last time you went to the playoffs was with Wade Phillips and the last time you won a playoff game in 17 years (!) was with Wade as well. In other words your chances of winning the Super Bowl were much much higher under Wade Phillips than Jason Garrett. There are, of course, better coaches than Wade around but none of them are willing to work for Jerry Jones.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 06, 2013, 11:46:19 AM Wade Phillips is just about the most imposing motherfucker on the planet.
(http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2010/1104/dal_a_phillips1x_sq_300.jpg) (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/28/Wade_Phillips.jpg/300px-Wade_Phillips.jpg) :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2013, 12:13:59 PM The last time you went to the playoffs was with Wade Phillips and the last time you won a playoff game in 17 years (!) was with Wade as well. In other words your chances of winning the Super Bowl were much much higher under Wade Phillips than Jason Garrett. There are, of course, better coaches than Wade around but none of them are willing to work for Jerry Jones. The chances of winning a super bowl with either are close to zero. I don't really care if Wade is .0002 and Garrett is .0001, it's still shitty with either at the helm. Dallas went 15 years between Super Bowls the last time, and now it's even longer. It doesn't mean the fans don't still use it as the benchmark of success. This isn't Cleveland. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 06, 2013, 01:29:10 PM The chances of winning a super bowl with either are close to zero. I don't really care if Wade is .0002 and Garrett is .0001, it's still shitty with either at the helm. The Cowboys' problem with the Super Bowl has nothing to do with their coach, and everything to do with Jerry Motherfucking Jones. As long as he's setting the team lineup, you could resurrect Zombie Vince Lombardi with Jesus Christ as OC and Muhammeed as DC and they still won't win a Super Bowl. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 06, 2013, 01:31:17 PM Yeah, but after all these years, you'd think SOME football would rub off on JJ.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 06, 2013, 01:39:25 PM His ego gets in the way of any actual knowledge.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 06, 2013, 02:15:13 PM Jerry doesn't understand how to draft in the offensive trenches. This has been the Dallas problem under him.
He drafted Doug Free as OT who is still playing although being a complete rollercoaster. He drafted James Marten 3rd round as an OT who eventually ended up retiring in 2011 after sucking. Robert Brewster was a wasted 3rd round pick on an OL, he lasted only a year. Finally after basically 5 years of fucking it up, Jerry got Tyron Smith, first round OT. He got that one right. Smith is the reason this team isn't like the team last year. After a completely awful turnstyle of left tackles, they finally have a guy in place who isn't a disaster, and isn't getting Romo killed. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Raguel on December 08, 2013, 01:47:54 PM There are some coaches that are great at being coordinators but lousy at being head coaches. I'd love to have Turner at OC and Philips at DC, but otherwise no thank you.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on December 08, 2013, 03:35:43 PM And the Patriots manage to, most likely, secure a first round bye and their playoff exit in the same game. Win the game, lose Gronkowski.
Go Seahawks. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 08, 2013, 03:51:33 PM Technically, the refs secured that for the Pats. :why_so_serious:
Manning after today's game, on not playing well in the cold, "Whoever wrote that narrative can shove that where the sun don't shine." Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 08, 2013, 06:10:35 PM It wasn't that cold in Denver's game. It was like 50s and sunny.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 08, 2013, 06:17:11 PM Close -- 18 degrees.
Loved all the snow games today. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 08, 2013, 06:20:27 PM It wasn't that cold in Denver's game. It was like 50s and sunny. Uh... as Trippy pointed out it was 15-20 at kickoff, but it got less than that. And there was wind, which made it feel closer to 0 or so. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 08, 2013, 06:24:34 PM Nevermind, the NFL box score was updating wrong. That's cold.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 08, 2013, 06:26:05 PM Nevermind, the NFL box score was updating wrong. That's cold. Also, I watched the friggin game, Paelos. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 08, 2013, 06:30:40 PM To be fair, it's hard to see "cold" when I turn on the game and it's Sunny. I certainly didn't immediately go, "oh yeah, frigid" like I did with the Green Bay - Atlanta game.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on December 09, 2013, 08:27:45 AM I think the NFL should make snow for the last 5 weeks of the season. Those games were really fun to watch.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on December 09, 2013, 08:39:43 AM We've got a chance for one of those in the Super Bowl this year. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 09, 2013, 08:49:22 AM To be fair, it's hard to see "cold" when I turn on the game and it's Sunny. I certainly didn't immediately go, "oh yeah, frigid" like I did with the Green Bay - Atlanta game. No it's not. If you see breath huffing out of all the guys you know it's cold. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 09, 2013, 09:38:30 AM So no one wants to win the NFC North this year - it must have cooties. :why_so_serious: Green Bay, SOMEHOW, still has a shot. If Chicago loses tonight (fuckers making me root FOR the Cowboys - FUCK), Green Bay wins out and all 3 teams end up with only 9 wins, Green Bay wins because of their tie and 1 less loss. That would be genuinely LOVELY. Of course, without Rodgers winning out is probably not happening and even with him, it's a close run thing.
New Orleans looks unstoppable at home. Too bad they'll likely have to go through Seattle to get to the Super Bowl unless SOMEBODY can figure out a way to beat them at home. I'm not sure anybody CAN beat them at home this year, as they stack up well against any team in that building. Even on the road against a good D, Seattle almost won that game yesterday. New England is hosed. They have feasted on a cupcake division and will get seriously exposed in the playoffs without Gronk. Even with him, they haven't been a well-oiled machine. Their defense is paper thin at this point, and while they have good wideouts, without Gronk they don't really have an go-to guy. Please God, don't let Baltimore make the playoffs. Flacco winning another Super Bowl might make me suicidal. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on December 09, 2013, 09:42:40 AM Please God, don't let Baltimore make the playoffs. Flacco winning another Super Bowl might make me suicidal. This should really be emphasized. :awesome_for_real: I was getting the Browns game updated on my phone while out and about with my better half and told her at one point, the Browns were winning in the 3rd quarter - then under my breath mentioned they'll probably lose it by a field goal or less. She laughed and agreed. Checked the final as I was riding back to the airport and showed her. Felt kinda good having a team that is predictable. :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on December 09, 2013, 10:01:31 AM Bmore is well poised for a run, they seem to have all their best players healthy or on the mend, they have a road game winning team and Flacco can certainly turn it on. They probably travel to New England or Cincy in the first round or host the Bengals, those are winnable games and once you have one playoff win any team can go all the way. Belief is a powerful thing.
Its hard to imagine them getting past Denver twice in a row but maybe it just won't be Manning's year yet again. Here's hoping. Fuck Elway. Meanwhile in the NFC its hard to not predict a Saints and Seahawks final considering the home form of both teams. If the Saints win in Saint Louis in convincing fashion and then beat Carolina at Carolina we can revisit how for real they are and if they can overcome the Seahawks. I do think there will be a 49ers @ Seattle playoff game and things really get nuts when you play a team for the third time in a year but if Wilson and Co. can get past that you've gotta think they ought to make the super bowl. However, most importantly for me is, please football gods, don't let the Eagles go on any kind of playoff run. There is no worse fanbase in all of sports. For that reason I really want the Niners pulping the Eagles not whatever outfit comes out of the NFC North round one. I can't trust Carolina to get the job done against the eagles and fuck Cam Newton anyways. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on December 09, 2013, 10:34:36 AM This will tell you everything you need to know about the end of the Ravens/Vikings game:
And the Eagles/Lions game: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Fordel on December 09, 2013, 12:22:03 PM That game was really fun to watch! The snowy one.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 09, 2013, 01:43:33 PM Its hard to imagine them getting past Denver twice in a row but maybe it just won't be Manning's year yet again. Here's hoping. Fuck Elway. They already didn't. (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2013090500/2013/REG1/ravens@broncos?icampaign=GC_schedule_rr) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 09, 2013, 01:51:02 PM Shanahan is going to bench RGIII for the rest of the year. Not a bad move, really, as he's never been healthy.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 09, 2013, 01:56:48 PM Shanahan is going to bench RGIII for the rest of the year. Not a bad move, really, as he's never been healthy. He's actively trying to get fired. He gets $7M if they get rid of him now. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on December 09, 2013, 02:00:04 PM Snyder is trying to find a way to fire Shanahan with cause so he doesn't have to pay the remainder of the contract.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on December 09, 2013, 02:00:56 PM Its hard to imagine them getting past Denver twice in a row but maybe it just won't be Manning's year yet again. Here's hoping. Fuck Elway. They already didn't. (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2013090500/2013/REG1/ravens@broncos?icampaign=GC_schedule_rr) Twice in a row in the playoffs. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on December 09, 2013, 02:04:53 PM No no see a week one game that shouldn't have been a home game except for the fucking clownshoes Orioles are morons is basically the same thing as a playoff eliminator. Yup yup totally the same. In fact you could say Denver has their number and their win is all but assured. :awesome_for_real:
For serious though its gonna be sweet when a 2/3 favorite doesn't win the AFC and people have to make another set of excuses for Manning. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 09, 2013, 02:08:27 PM Its hard to imagine them getting past Denver twice in a row but maybe it just won't be Manning's year yet again. Here's hoping. Fuck Elway. They already didn't. (http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/2013090500/2013/REG1/ravens@broncos?icampaign=GC_schedule_rr) Twice in a row in the playoffs. Yes, I know. It was a joke. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 09, 2013, 02:13:59 PM Shanahan is going to bench RGIII for the rest of the year. Not a bad move, really, as he's never been healthy. I've been saying that since about week 4 or 5. Just watching the kid struggle is PAINFUL. He's clearly talented, but he wasn't ready to come back at the beginning of the season either mentally or physically. I just hope it hasn't damaged his confidence for good because when he's on, he's electric to watch. Griffin is still not right and I don't think he's going to be right the rest of this year. The fact that every team in the shitpile of a division that is the NFC East has a shot at the playoffs at this point is just disgusting. Otherwise, they should shut RGIII down and let him recuperate for next year. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 09, 2013, 02:15:52 PM Snyder is trying to find a way to fire Shanahan with cause so he doesn't have to pay the remainder of the contract. You don't think that Snyder would actually let Shanahan bench RGIII without good reason, do you? The guy is just as bad as Jerrah. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 09, 2013, 02:18:23 PM Benching a player isn't cause. They are trying to get him for that on leaking info to the press.
He can bench all the players he wants and there isn't a damn thing they can do about it except fire him, but not for cause. He's the coach. That's in his realm of authority. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on December 09, 2013, 02:33:52 PM Found it. That was a lot harder than it needed to be. 4 Mike Tomlin jokes in one clip. That'll do, NFL recap guy. That'll do. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on December 09, 2013, 02:41:49 PM No, the NFL just hates the Dolphins. Always have, since Marino then JJ left.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2013, 08:17:17 AM I reiterate what I said about the NFL completely disregarding defense this year.
42 for the Bungles 37 for the Jets 45 for the Chiefs 51 for the Broncos 37 for the Chargers 45 for the Bears 10 teams scored 30+ in a week where it was freezing with snow. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 10, 2013, 08:19:28 AM So who has a decent defense that is going to crank it up in the playoffs and win the Superbowl?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2013, 08:24:42 AM Seattle and New Orleans will be the favorites based on their defense at home. Whoever gets the advantage will have a huge feather in the cap.
Put them both in the Super Bowl on a neutral snowy field though? I don't like either team. I like the Pats still if they could get that far. The problem would be playing in Denver if they don't falter. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 10, 2013, 08:54:18 AM Yeah, open air cold weather Superbowl is just fuck all stupid.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on December 10, 2013, 09:33:02 AM I hope it's hilarious.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2013, 09:35:10 AM I welcome the idea of Tundra Bowl 2014. Fuck all this "Super Bowl must be in tropical fucking weather." You want it in the Tropics, play the season in the summer. This is FOOTBALL RRRRRAAAAAGGGGGHHHH!!!
Defense is dead in the league. You have about as many good defenses as you have elite QB's in the NFL these days. Everybody else is unable to tackle shit, can't cover a fucking thing and can't pass rush. I actually felt sorry for Dallas last night because they are playing a goddamn community college defense with all the injuries they are facing. And for all the talk about Chip Kelly's high powered offense, what Trestman has done to the Bears is a goddamn miracle. FFS, the right side of his O line is two rookies and they are flattening people. Alshon Jeffrey looks like he has ups as good as Calvin Johnson. Brandon Marshall is getting open. And he's doing it with JOSH MCCOWN. Too bad the Bears defense is utter shit. Should have given Urlacher another year to tutor some of these young linebackers. Of course, against the Cowboys, it doesn't matter because even if the running game is working, Garrett will ignore it completely for 2 quarters even when the passing game isn't working just because. Seriously, 1st and 4th quarter, Murray and Randle are making 10-12 yard gashes EVERY RUN. Why stop? Right, so you can let Trestman's offense shred your defense. Garrett is just a terrible coach - a decent OC who can create an effective passing game but he needs somebody to slap his hand and force good football on him. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on December 10, 2013, 09:44:38 AM This could be the start of another wonderful Cowboy's December, good times. I hate that its benefiting the Eagles but its always fun to watch Romo romo it up.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2013, 09:58:07 AM This could be the start of another wonderful Cowboy's December, good times. I hate that its benefiting the Eagles but its always fun to watch Romo romo it up. Cowboys are done. That loss will set them back, and they now have to face a Green Bay team that likely brings Rodgers back just in time to own them. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2013, 10:02:45 AM This could be the start of another wonderful Cowboy's December, good times. I hate that its benefiting the Eagles but its always fun to watch Romo romo it up. Cowboys are done. That loss will set them back, and they now have to face a Green Bay team that likely brings Rodgers back just in time to own them. Neither Rodgers nor Randall Cobb have been medically cleared to play against the Cowboys yet. It's early in the week, but don't expect either to play. And if Rodgers doesn't play, I expect a Cowboys' win because their offense is better than ours without Rodgers, even if Romo's already checked out for Christmas. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2013, 10:04:12 AM Packers need the win though. And they know they can't win with Flynn against the Cowboys.
Whoever loses that game is basically eliminated by pure math. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 10, 2013, 10:19:23 AM Too bad the Bears defense is utter shit. Should have given Urlacher another year to tutor some of these young linebackers. Of course, against the Cowboys, it doesn't matter because even if the running game is working, Garrett will ignore it completely for 2 quarters even when the passing game isn't working just because. Seriously, 1st and 4th quarter, Murray and Randle are making 10-12 yard gashes EVERY RUN. Why stop? Right, so you can let Trestman's offense shred your defense. Garrett is just a terrible coach - a decent OC who can create an effective passing game but he needs somebody to slap his hand and force good football on him. Bill Callahan calls the offensive plays now.Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2013, 11:06:45 AM Paelos Power Rankings:
1 - Seattle 2 - Denver 3 - Saints 4 - Pats 5 - Carolina 6 - SF 7 - Philly 8 - KC 9 - Cincy 10 - Detroit Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 10, 2013, 11:33:46 AM I see no Jets on your rankings, so they are irrelevant.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on December 10, 2013, 11:36:54 AM Yeah, open air cold weather Superbowl is just fuck all I agree. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: ghost on December 10, 2013, 11:39:58 AM Yeah, open air cold weather Superbowl is just fuck all I agree. No. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2013, 11:46:07 AM Too bad the Bears defense is utter shit. Should have given Urlacher another year to tutor some of these young linebackers. Of course, against the Cowboys, it doesn't matter because even if the running game is working, Garrett will ignore it completely for 2 quarters even when the passing game isn't working just because. Seriously, 1st and 4th quarter, Murray and Randle are making 10-12 yard gashes EVERY RUN. Why stop? Right, so you can let Trestman's offense shred your defense. Garrett is just a terrible coach - a decent OC who can create an effective passing game but he needs somebody to slap his hand and force good football on him. Bill Callahan calls the offensive plays now.But Garrett sets the tone, and likely can say to Callahan - hey, let's pass the ball. Either way, they are both shitty game coaches. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2013, 11:47:00 AM They are both Jerry's buttpuppets.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2013, 11:48:56 AM Well, I always remember Callahan for what a train wreck he made of the Raiders. Takes over after Gruden and gets them to the Super Bowl to face Gruden's Bucs - who promptly hammer the shit out of the Raiders because Callahan didn't bother to change anything about the offensive scheme and Gruden had his entire playbook. Next year with almost the same personnel, Callahan's Raiders barely won any games and started the drop into irrelevance that the Raiders are still suffering from.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on December 10, 2013, 12:05:46 PM I reiterate what I said about the NFL completely disregarding defense this year. I don't know about the entire NFL, but the Cowboys sure are disregarding it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2013, 12:14:52 PM There are 13 (THIRTEEN!?!?) teams this year giving up 25 points or more a game.
Let's just jump in a time machine for a second back to 2005, the first year after the big pass penalty changes. There were only 4 teams over 25 points against per game back in 2005. In 2006 there were 2. 2007 there were 5. 2008 there were 5. 2009 there were 6. 2010 there were 8. 2011 there were 8. 2012 there were 9. And now, fucking 13 teams. It's gotten worse and worse and worse every single year, and this is blowing the cover off of the shitpile of bad defenses. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 10, 2013, 12:23:49 PM Some of the ESPN pundits have been talking about the collective bargaining agreement that was signed at the beginning of last season and how it mandates less contact drills in practice and training camp. They postulate this is why the tackling skills have gone to complete shit, as well as why there have been so many more injuries (less time preparing the body for the stresses of the game). I don't know if I buy it, but I can certainly testify that tackling skills have become utter and complete shit the last two seasons. Just an insane amount of missed tackles, bad arm tackles or tacklers taking insanely bad angles at tackling. And stats show that injuries ARE up this year by a dramatic amount despite the NFL trying to minimize high injury plays like kickoffs and mandating against particular types of hits because of safety issues.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2013, 12:26:40 PM At this point, we're heading for arena football type scores.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: naum on December 10, 2013, 01:33:26 PM (http://archive.azplace.net/images/Twitter___ddockett__RT__tmac628__I_can_say_with_..._1857C05B.png)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 10, 2013, 01:34:17 PM Evernote link failure.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2013, 01:38:31 PM That is not a cute baby pic for an avatar.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: naum on December 10, 2013, 01:41:13 PM That is not a cute baby pic for an avatar. I think the "in prison" reference was triggered by this: (http://img.gawkerassets.com/img/198szki6qdro1gif/ku-xlarge.gif) http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/08/darnell-dockett-steps-on-chris-williams-hand/ Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 10, 2013, 03:10:43 PM I think one of the reasons is that defenses are going low now because the league has gotten so tough on upper body hits. I mean, we don't want guys getting brain damage, but the area to hit an offensive player is two centimeters just left of his belly button now.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on December 10, 2013, 03:16:00 PM What are the rules for that now? Can you still tackle people around the thighs and waist?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on December 10, 2013, 03:25:57 PM What are the rules for that now? Can you still tackle people around the thighs and waist? Nope. The guy might duck and then it would be headshot. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on December 10, 2013, 03:36:49 PM Seriously?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on December 10, 2013, 03:40:46 PM Seriously? Well the tackle would inevitably ride up into the helmet and they'd get fined! :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 10, 2013, 04:05:16 PM You can still tackle everyone low except the QB.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on December 11, 2013, 12:18:47 AM I welcome the idea of Tundra Bowl 2014. Fuck all this "Super Bowl must be in tropical fucking weather." You want it in the Tropics, play the season in the summer. This is FOOTBALL RRRRRAAAAAGGGGGHHHH!!! Fuck yeah. I hope it's cold as shit. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on December 11, 2013, 03:46:04 AM Some of the ESPN pundits have been talking about the collective bargaining agreement that was signed at the beginning of last season and how it mandates less contact drills in practice and training camp. They postulate this is why the tackling skills have gone to complete shit, as well as why there have been so many more injuries (less time preparing the body for the stresses of the game). I don't know if I buy it, but I can certainly testify that tackling skills have become utter and complete shit the last two seasons. Just an insane amount of missed tackles, bad arm tackles or tacklers taking insanely bad angles at tackling. And stats show that injuries ARE up this year by a dramatic amount despite the NFL trying to minimize high injury plays like kickoffs and mandating against particular types of hits because of safety issues. The stuff that keeps breaking is the stuff that you can't toughen up. You can't train ligaments like the ACL and MCL like you can muscle; so I don't buy the "preparing the body for the stresses of the game" argument. It also seems that the majority of the season-ending injuries have been knee injuries, which would fit the the rules change forcing people to tackle lower moreso than any hypothesis about tackling skills or toughness. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on December 11, 2013, 06:16:36 AM There are ways to play and somewhat avoid injury, and I assume that these tactics are learned during practice. I've known people who are accident-prone and typically this is because they are reckless rather than fragile, although I can't discount fragility. I believe that Gronk gets injured so much because of his playstyle, for example.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on December 11, 2013, 07:25:23 AM You can still tackle everyone low except the QB. This year anyways. Its probably going to change as well with all the extra knee injuries occurring due to everyone trying to avoid headshot fines. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on December 11, 2013, 07:26:57 AM Next year they'll just make a tackling strike zone like in baseball. 4 tackles outside the strikezone and the other team gets a walk (automatic first down).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on December 11, 2013, 07:55:53 AM Or, you know, they could actually make a tackle and not go for the ping pong hit. If your arms aren't wrapping up the ballcarrier, you ain't tackling. I have serious issue with defensive players that I see pull their arms down right before contact.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 11, 2013, 08:20:08 AM I love the guys that take a wrong angle and then just flap their arms uselessly at a guy running past them like this is touch football or some shit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on December 11, 2013, 08:37:05 AM 2015: National Flag Football League
Either that or there's a revolt and holding becomes legal. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on December 11, 2013, 10:40:55 AM Darnell Dockett has always been a cheapshotting piece of shit. That is a far more deliberate 'attempt to injure' than any of the defenseless receiver hits ever are. He really needs to be suspended.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on December 11, 2013, 11:29:31 AM This game of chicken between Shanahan and Snyder is hilarious. I think the next step is for Snyder to burst into Shanahan's news conference and start hitting him with a folding chair. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 11, 2013, 11:43:14 AM It is quite awesome. "Don't want to fire me? Fine, I'll bench your franchise first round draft pick QB!" I still think Shanahan is making the right football decision benching RGIII.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on December 11, 2013, 12:15:21 PM Another perfect spot for a murder/suicide to solve all kinds of problems. I don't hate Shanahan that much, but am wiling to sacrifice him in order to take Snyder out.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 11, 2013, 06:01:35 PM I love the guys that take a wrong angle and then just flap their arms uselessly at a guy running past them like this is touch football or some shit. AKA, The Tackling of the Denver Broncos. *grumbles* Another perfect spot for a murder/suicide to solve all kinds of problems. I don't hate Shanahan that much, but am wiling to sacrifice him in order to take Snyder out. Why not? Shanahan is a piece of shit. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on December 11, 2013, 08:20:10 PM I think because he looks sort of like my old high school coach's Oompa Loompa brother.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on December 11, 2013, 09:39:32 PM There are ways to play and somewhat avoid injury, and I assume that these tactics are learned during practice. I've known people who are accident-prone and typically this is because they are reckless rather than fragile, although I can't discount fragility. I believe that Gronk gets injured so much because of his playstyle, for example. Gronk got injured because he thought he could just mindlessly rumble down the field like a Sherman tank. His tackler was right in front of him and went low with a shoulder tackle. What does Gronk do? Just keep running normally. That's just stupid. Keller's injury, however, should be finable and a penalty... a near complete blindside surprise tackle on a defenseless receiver to the knee no different then a chop-block or a crack-back really, both of which are penalties normally. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 13, 2013, 06:19:37 AM Peyton's right, cold weather doesn't matter. Especially when they keep turning the ball over.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Yegolev on December 13, 2013, 06:25:31 AM Peyton's right, cold weather doesn't matter. Especially when they keep turning the ball over. Hush, you'll make him cry into his pizza. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 13, 2013, 01:02:02 PM There was only one fucking turnover. The loss was not at all on Peyton's shoulders.
The Broncos D (which I've complained about this season quite a bit) is mediocre at BEST and played a lot worse than that yesterday. Plus Chargers are a better team than their record indicates and Rivers, as usual, is a great QB. I fucking hate him, but he's a great QB. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 13, 2013, 01:07:50 PM And now the Pats control the AFC. I mean it's all coming together for Brady and his band of misfits minus Gronk.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 13, 2013, 01:12:19 PM We still have more wins than the Pats, and are still ranked as the #1 seed.
Broncos have HOU to OAK to go. Pats have MIA, BAL and CIN to go. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 13, 2013, 01:14:51 PM Fun interactive chart for comparing current QB stats:
http://trynudge.com/index.html?view=Editor&play=NQki9OYgwgq Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 13, 2013, 01:24:17 PM We still have more wins than the Pats, and are still ranked as the #1 seed. Broncos have HOU to OAK to go. Pats have MIA, BAL and CIN to go. True, but they have the tiebreaker. Win against Miami, and they have the lead with 2 to play. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 13, 2013, 01:26:44 PM We still have more wins than the Pats, and are still ranked as the #1 seed. Broncos have HOU to OAK to go. Pats have MIA, BAL and CIN to go. True, but they have the tiebreaker. Win against Miami, and they have the lead with 2 to play. Yes, I understand how math works. The Pats have a much harder schedule than the Broncos have, is the point. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on December 13, 2013, 02:22:01 PM Pats have Bills at home not Bengals, they already lost to Bengals.
AFC seeding from #1 on down is totally up for grabs if you believe that the Broncos are now human and a blueprint for exposing their weaknesses now exists. This week is the first of 3 great ones in terms of games that really matter. -Pats must put away Miami, which seems far from a given but I expect it. If they don't they could fall out of getting a bye. -Cincy must beat Steelers in primetime away, which is the exact kind of game Dalton's Bengals have not won often. Favorites. On the road. Primetime. Division opponent. High pressure. If they lose here they could in theory fall pretty far as it will heap pressure on that season finale against Baltimore. -Ravens have to win in Detroit on MNF and not have that take so much out of them that they can handle the Pats the next week. I think its unlikely that they can win both these games but you never know with that franchise or AFC North teams in general at this time of year. I suspect that Broncos are going to be just fine sadly since they have a cake walk schedule to finish the year. Denver is barring catastrophe is finishing 13-3, and only the Pats can catch them at that mark and they need two big road wins to do that. Unless Manning chokes again against two of the bottom feeders of the league. The Raiders will try but it being the Raiders they will somehow blow it in the 4th quarter. *not calk, cake* Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 13, 2013, 02:42:19 PM Pats have Bills at home not Bengals, they already lost to Bengals. AFC seeding from #1 on down is totally up for grabs if you believe that the Broncos are now human and a blueprint for exposing their weaknesses now exists. This week is the first of 3 great ones in terms of games that really matter. Woops, yeah, I crossed my wire somewher when looking at schedules. The blueprint has existed for a while now. I thought the Colts would upset us and was called crazy for it. Our defense has been horrible. Our Run D has been great, but even they played badly last night. Shifting the offense around and missing Bailey has really made things go wonky this season. I really hope the Broncos nab the #1 seed just so we can advance one round at least, but it's pretty clear we'll at least end up with the #2. The weaknesses that have grown and now are back breaking make me pretty worried for the post season. I'm still in awe that San Diego played clock management football and kept the ball out of Peyton's hand. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 13, 2013, 04:20:45 PM It's not impossible that SD could be a WC Super Bowl contender
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 14, 2013, 09:15:08 AM It's not impossible that SD could be a WC Super Bowl contender Not impossible at all. They're a better team than KC. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 14, 2013, 11:01:20 AM The tough factor is they have to go 9-7 and hope Miami doesn't, as I believe the fish have the tiebreaker.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on December 14, 2013, 11:24:40 AM Their defense is terrible.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 15, 2013, 04:45:31 PM Worst Defense in the league strikes again.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 15, 2013, 04:50:26 PM Damn, Dallas your defense and your coaches suck. Y U NO RUN? Really needed you to beat GB today. Nice collapse there. So impressed with GB, they are holding their team together with spit and bailing wire. And winning. It's a shame Flynn will be forgotten when Rogers gets back. Flynn needs a starting job somewhere.
How bout dem Fins! Signature win vs. the Pats. Great defensive stand against Brady there. Pats not as bad as the ESPN chicken-littles claimed though. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 15, 2013, 04:54:02 PM We have no coaches. I'm not sure what to make of this at all, when both teams I love refuse TO PLAY SOME FUCKING DEFENSE.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 15, 2013, 07:03:14 PM What is it with supposedly decent teams coming out and falling flat on their faces this year? Cincinnati has a very winnable game and so far have just laid an egg.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 15, 2013, 07:06:27 PM Honestly, I still think it's the changes to player practices. It's created a really terrible NFL product this year for a ton of teams.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Merusk on December 15, 2013, 07:08:09 PM What is it with supposedly decent teams coming out and falling flat on their faces this year? Cincinnati has a very winnable game and so far have just laid an egg. Welcome to the Bengals. They play down to their competition every year. It's why they've been one and done when they HAVE made the playoffs, they just haven't got winning in their makeup. Some blame Lewis, but since Mike Brown plays a hand in every decision there's more to it than just the coach. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on December 15, 2013, 07:16:59 PM If Jason Garrett still has a job in a month there will be a fucking riot in big D.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 15, 2013, 09:55:53 PM Flynn needs a starting job somewhere. Like Seattle! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MediumHigh on December 15, 2013, 10:29:50 PM It's hard for me to say "play some D" when sniffing at a wide receiver is pass interference. Literally only thing stopping some of these offenses are themselves.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 16, 2013, 10:17:27 AM If Jason Garrett still has a job in a month there will be a fucking riot in big D. I'm going to give Dallas some credit. They have had a SHITTON of injuries on defense. But yes, this should be a truism. Garrett is not a good coach. He's a decent play scheme creator but he's just fucking horrible at calling plays during the game. His idea of balance is that when the game is over, we've called almost the same number of running plays as passing, even if the situation did not call for it. And because of Jerry Jones, I can't say how much is his fault. Dez Bryant stomping off the field like a petulant child when the game isn't yet officially over? That's the kind of shit he should get benched for, at least for a quarter, but he likely won't be. That whole organization is just dysfunctional. Green Bay, OTOH - Amazing what Matt Flynn can do on a competent team with a competent coaching staff. I don't know why he hasn't worked out in Seattle and Oakland. He certainly seems capable of starting in Green Bay. LOL Saints - way to let Carolina back in the picture with a loss to the shitty Rams. Same LOL goes to the Bengals. Looking at the box score, I can't understand what went on in this game. By the stats, the Steelers should have lost. And a 3rd big LOL to the Pats - an early exit from the playoffs is in their future. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on December 16, 2013, 10:39:39 AM Not sure why people still give the Pats props. It was obvious this season that the phins were poised to take over the division; just hasnt happened due to a lot of external bullshit (refs, player misconduct, etc.) Sherman's playcalling was the next big hindrance, but apparently he's now decided to listen to his detractors... his last 3 games have been called pretty well.
They decided to keep Incognito suspended w/pay rather then simply bring him back. Not sure why they did this since they're still real thin at line... I want to win; I dont care as much about the man's character. Ironically, it was a Jonathan Martin Stanford teammate that saved the phins' season (for now) on the Pats' final drive. The phins stole this guy off the 49ers practice squad and word is SanFran really didnt want him to go (even offered him more money). He wanted a shot at some gametime though and took it. Coaches put him solo against Amendola on two TD attempts (that takes balls); knowing full well Brady would target him. Kudos to him and the coordinator... and I love seeing the intellect on a team regardless. edit: Turns out he missed calls from his agent all morning (he slept late) for the phins' roster and the phins almost pulled the trigger on someone else. He made the team by like, an hour, and was on a plane an hour after that; and the only reason he got the call is because a former cut phins player (Moore - receiver) who played for the 9ers the 1st half of the season (and then was re-signed by the phins a month ago) let the staff know the guy was beast on the 9ers practice squad. Cool story. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2013, 11:11:51 AM Pats v. Panthers in the Super Bowl. Calling it now. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on December 16, 2013, 11:30:08 AM Same LOL goes to the Bengals. Looking at the box score, I can't understand what went on in this game. By the stats, the Steelers should have lost.
What? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 16, 2013, 11:49:06 AM Same LOL goes to the Bengals. Looking at the box score, I can't understand what went on in this game. By the stats, the Steelers should have lost. What? Other than the rushing stats, Dalton's numbers were better than the Rapist, they had equal number of turnovers, etc. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: naum on December 16, 2013, 01:09:36 PM Same LOL goes to the Bengals. Looking at the box score, I can't understand what went on in this game. By the stats, the Steelers should have lost.
What? Did not get to tune in until the 3rd quarter but here lies the score differential and reason the stats are so close: * Steelers jumped out to 24-0 lead and Bengals played catchup for rest of game; and especially late game, Steeler D granted little chunks to not get beat by big play * A punt return TD (by A. Brown) * 2 failed 4th down conversions by the Bengals that sealed their doom Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on December 16, 2013, 01:33:37 PM If Jason Garrett still has a job in a month there will be a fucking riot in big D. I'm going to give Dallas some credit. They have had a SHITTON of injuries on defense. But yes, this should be a truism. Garrett is not a good coach. He's a decent play scheme creator but he's just fucking horrible at calling plays during the game. His idea of balance is that when the game is over, we've called almost the same number of running plays as passing, even if the situation did not call for it. And because of Jerry Jones, I can't say how much is his fault. Dez Bryant stomping off the field like a petulant child when the game isn't yet officially over? That's the kind of shit he should get benched for, at least for a quarter, but he likely won't be. That whole organization is just dysfunctional. Is Jason Garrett really at fault for the play calling? I thought Jerry Jones stripped him of offensive playcalling duties this season and gave that to Bill Callahan. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2013, 01:38:41 PM The entire coaching staff is at fault for what happened. Even if Callahan is calling plays, after the first time they do nothing but throw on a series of downs where you should be bleeding clock, everyone gets together on the sidelines after that and gets on the same page. That's the job of the head coach.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on December 16, 2013, 01:53:15 PM Sounds like the real problem is Jerry Jones. Good luck with that. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2013, 02:10:54 PM It comes back to the same thing. We have an undrafted QB who gets paid millions to be mediocre, we have a defense that's so injured even Monte Kiffin can't fix it, and the last guy is now leading NOLA to a great defensive year, and we have a head coach that shouldn't be a head coach that was hired specifically to replace the last head coach who shouldn't have been a head coach.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: shiznitz on December 16, 2013, 02:12:31 PM The Eagles deserve just as much Defense mockery as Dallas. They let the Vikings 3rd string RB score 3 TDs and make Kassel look good. IN THE SAME FUCKING GAME!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 16, 2013, 02:19:13 PM But why pass Dallas why? You were averaging over 7 yards a carry (I think) and needed to eat the clock. So you started passing? Make them stack eight in the box before you start passing!
Eagles and Giants stumble, does no one want to win the East? Just when I thought the Eagles had gotten their shit together. Giants are horrible, Eli couldn't complete a pass to an Applebee's waitress. Now Detroit has to win tonight. They have got to win the division; there's very little room for a Wild Card spot. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2013, 02:23:45 PM Cowboys can still win out and win. The East is a fucking joke.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 16, 2013, 02:57:46 PM Cowboys can still win out and win. The East is a fucking joke. This. The East has been a dumpster fire rolling on 3 wheels this entire season. The Eagles got ahead of themselves with all the Chip Kelly praise and got ROUTED by a Vikings team led by Matt fucking Cassel and without both Adrian Peterson and their 2nd string running back. I just... I don't even... how does that happen? The NFC North is still so up in the air but at least you can blame it on QB injuries. If Rodgers is healthy, Green Bay walks to that division title. Detroit can't stop stepping on their own dicks and I expect them to lose tonight simply because they should win. Chicago can't stop anybody but their offense runs like clockwork no matter who you put under center. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on December 16, 2013, 07:22:30 PM If you watched the Bengals game you would know that the punter before he got his neck broken by some typical Steelers shit basically doomed that game with back to back to back awful outings, in fact I'd dare say I've never seen a pro punter fuck up 3 times in a row that badly, its like he completely got mindfucked by the initial dropped snap. That combined with the surreal fair catch thing on the kick off between two of those punts was just too much special teams fuck ups for one Sunday. It was just too much to recover from.
Though in general I agree with the sentiment that they are still playing down to opposition there is some solace to be garnered in the fact that on a day that the o-line wr's and run game were all fucking up Dalton never went into sabotage the entire day mode and had a solid game with the rest of the team falling apart. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on December 17, 2013, 03:07:39 AM I'm not sure the Ravens can kick their way to a second superbowl win, but I'm willing to watch them try.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on December 17, 2013, 03:12:13 AM It'll work if they can play the Lions every game.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on December 17, 2013, 04:43:35 AM Same LOL goes to the Bengals. Looking at the box score, I can't understand what went on in this game. By the stats, the Steelers should have lost. What? Other than the rushing stats, Dalton's numbers were better than the Rapist, they had equal number of turnovers, etc.
It might just be my fan glasses, but given the Bengals had to dig themselves out of a 21 point hole makes it even more impressive that Dalton's and Ben's raw numbers are about even what with Cinci trying to air it out 44 times. Yes, Dalton didn't lose them the game but he certainly wasn't able to carry them either. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2013, 06:08:51 AM And just like that, the Packers are back in it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on December 17, 2013, 06:35:46 AM And just like that, the Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2013, 06:43:06 AM Packers just need to win out, same as Cowboys.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Merusk on December 17, 2013, 07:13:26 AM If you watched the Bengals game you would know that the punter before he got his neck broken by some typical Steelers shit Here's the shit show, aboutthis. The Punter just reminds us of the injury Palmer took at the same time in the season from the Steelers several years ago, and little to nothing will be done about it. Nothing more than dollars changing hands in what is becoming a tradition from a shitty bunch of thugs. Fuck those fuckers and their fans. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on December 17, 2013, 07:31:26 AM Arizona are certainly a better-looking team this year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on December 17, 2013, 08:00:01 AM Packers just need to win out, same as Cowboys. Fortunately for the Bears, the Packers don't get to play the Cowboys any more this season... There's still a good chance that the two teams will be playing to get in on the final week. Appropriate. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on December 17, 2013, 08:14:08 AM If you watched the Bengals game you would know that the punter before he got his neck broken by some typical Steelers shit Here's the shit show, aboutthis. The Punter just reminds us of the injury Palmer took at the same time in the season from the Steelers several years ago, and little to nothing will be done about it. Nothing more than dollars changing hands in what is becoming a tradition from a shitty bunch of thugs. Fuck those fuckers and their fans. There's a dozen illegal hits and other shit any given week and you throw a tantrum because of this? The dude is going to get fined and it's probably going to be higher than his actual check for the game given that he's basically the last LB on the depth chart. (http://i.imgur.com/kE6hvhx.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2013, 08:32:35 AM He hit the dude in the chest. I have a hard time calling that a blindside block.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 17, 2013, 09:53:02 AM He hit the dude in the chest. I have a hard time calling that a blindside block. Other than leading with the crown of his helmet, I don't see what's wrong with that block from the Steeler player's perspective. The punter needs to have his head on a swivel in that situation. Instead he's not looking at the guy who just buried him, he's looking at the ball. And I'm not entirely sure leading with the helmet is a penalty in that situation. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on December 17, 2013, 10:23:57 AM He hit the dude in the chest. I have a hard time calling that a blindside block. Other than leading with the crown of his helmet, I don't see what's wrong with that block from the Steeler player's perspective. The punter needs to have his head on a swivel in that situation. Instead he's not looking at the guy who just buried him, he's looking at the ball. And I'm not entirely sure leading with the helmet is a penalty in that situation. Pecking around the web, most people quoting the rules state it was a legal block. Leading with the helmet and leaving his feet is probably going to end up in a fine though given the attention the league has for these things now. I mean come on, you are 100lbs heavier than the guy, all you really had to do was stand there and watch him bounce off you. But in the ESPN world, that would not have gotten any coverage for the wow factor. Being a Browns fan, I hate both these teams, but that hit was just flat out unnecessary. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2013, 10:26:12 AM He didn't lead with his helmet from what I can see, plants that shoulder straight into his shoulder.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 17, 2013, 10:27:23 AM He didn't lead with the crown. However his helmet did hit his jaw and fractured it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 17, 2013, 10:35:37 AM I just think it was a dick move. He sought out the punter because he knows he can get a big hit on him. Targeting a player like that on purpose is ridiculous. He could have blocked him just as effectively without trying to hit the highlight reel.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2013, 10:39:16 AM It's football. For heaven's sake. I mean honestly, I hate the whole macho "put a dress on him" arguments as much as anyone else, but this season has been fucking atrocious to watch, and a lot of this shit is to blame. Nobody knows what they can and can't do on a tackle or a block anymore. Everything is a business decision. There are more fines than ever.
I don't want this to turn into arena football or a season of 4 haves, 4 mehs, and 24 have-nots. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2013, 10:48:22 AM I just think it was a dick move. He sought out the punter because he knows he can get a big hit on him. Targeting a player like that on purpose is ridiculous. He could have blocked him just as effectively without trying to hit the highlight reel. What. Sought him out? It was a block. Show me an overhead angle on that play that shows him avoiding other players to go after him. As for severity, they are both moving in opposite directions at speed. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on December 17, 2013, 11:29:07 AM That's a legal block using technique they teach you in pop warner (the blocker even broke-down beforehand). The failure in technique was from the punter; who should've had his head on a swivel or at least assumed there y'know, just might be a blocker out there. You come onto the field with the world's best athletes, guys that run 30+mph and weigh over 225lbs, and think you can be like that punter? You're gonna get your bell rung every time. As far as I'm concerned he deserved to get knocked the fuck out. Stick to punting, not tackling.
Seriously, I cant believe we're having this conversation... especially after watching very relevant playoff-calibre teams get hosed (or not hosed) on calls like these. A High School story: idiot mis-coached kickoff returner thought it'd be wise to go head up through a wedge. Mind you, we had probably a top-5 defense in the entire state (better than St. Thomas Aquinas even). This scrawny kid w/o a care or any awareness just runs head-up right into our starting MLB. Kid gets wiped off the face of the earth by a perfect form tackle. No penalty. Kid goes away on a stretcher with a ruptured spleen. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on December 17, 2013, 11:46:58 AM Legal or not, right or wrong... the league set the precedent this year with these types of hits - on both sides of the ball.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on December 17, 2013, 11:54:21 AM It's an illegal block. Why? Because Kickers and Punters are considered defenseless during the whole time of a special teams play where they kicked or punted. Thus, you can't "forcibly" hit them in the head or neck area, even if the contact started below the neck and head area.
Yes, you read right. Considered defenseless during the whole play. Because they kicked the ball. Edit: And yes, it should have been a penalty negating the TD and moving the Steelers 15y back from the spot of the foul. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2013, 11:58:50 AM Source?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on December 17, 2013, 12:00:02 PM How is that not leading with the helmet? The first contact is helmet to face.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on December 17, 2013, 12:07:49 PM Source? http://www.footballzebras.com/2013/12/15/9594/ Quote Punters and kickers have special protections, and are considered one of the 10 players that are defined in the rules as being in a defenseless posture (this applies from the kick through any return). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bunk on December 17, 2013, 12:14:09 PM You really seeing it that way? It would help to be able to frame by frame it, but when I focus on just the punter in that clip, here's what I see: His head jerks to the left side of the screen at the point of contact, because the contact point is his chest. Then a frame or two later, whiplash makes his head jerk back. If the initial contact point was the helmet, you would not see his head snap forward first.
It's still pretty easy for your face to impact with the other guy's helmet even without the helmet being the initial contact point, just because of the whiplash effect. It was an unnecessarily rough hit, but not illegal I don't think. If this is the rule they are talking about: "It is a foul if a player initiates unnecessary contact against a player who is in a defenseless posture (including) a kicker/punter during the kick or during the return." - I would interpret that to mean you can't hit the punter if he's just standing there after he kicked it (to prevent players from hunting down the other teams kicker). In this play, the punter was clearly pursuing the play, ready to try to make a tackle. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 17, 2013, 12:17:41 PM I'm the last guy to come up with the "put on a dress, Sally" arguments, but I have to agree with Paelos. The NFL is putting a shit product on the field, and it's got a lot to do with all the idiotic exceptions and rules to who can be hit, when they can be hit and how they can be hit. The fact that there's even an argument about whether or not a particular position player can be hit on a play is just insane. So if it's a fake punt, can the punter still be hit? And if the punter tries to block someone, does the guy that they try to block get a penalty for touching the punter?
Defensive play has been godawful this year and it needs to be fixed. Whether that's with letting more people get hit or letting people hit more in practice or what, I don't know. I only know that watching some of these games gets painful. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on December 17, 2013, 12:22:38 PM I'm the last guy to come up with the "put on a dress, Sally" arguments, but I have to agree with Paelos. The NFL is putting a shit product on the field, and it's got a lot to do with all the idiotic exceptions and rules to who can be hit, when they can be hit and how they can be hit. The fact that there's even an argument about whether or not a particular position player can be hit on a play is just insane. So if it's a fake punt, can the punter still be hit? And if the punter tries to block someone, does the guy that they try to block get a penalty for touching the punter? Defensive play has been godawful this year and it needs to be fixed. Whether that's with letting more people get hit or letting people hit more in practice or what, I don't know. I only know that watching some of these games gets painful. http://www.steelersdepot.com/2013/12/nfl-rulebook-hit-terence-garvin-kevin-huber-steelers-bengals/ Has a pretty nice shot of the point of contact. I am sure there will be sides debunking it and sides holding it up as proof. This should be pretty cut and dry given what has happened throughout the season (see: Gumby Drew Brees). And the punter/kicker rule is only on kicks and only applies to headshots. You are still able to block the punter. This has nothing to do with hitting anyone, it has to do with where the hit occurs or where it ends up. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2013, 12:27:30 PM That page 01101010 linked is pretty good. The screen shot definitely looks perhaps worse, but the angle I don't think gives a definitive proof of anything. To me, I'm still seeing contact with the shoulder first.
Okay that second link looks worse, but yeah, there's probably still some room for debate. But, definitely fine worthy, given the rule, I would think. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on December 17, 2013, 12:28:37 PM In case anyone is too lazy to follow the link:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BbnfbVCIMAAkfsW.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 17, 2013, 12:33:09 PM I'm the last guy to come up with the "put on a dress, Sally" arguments, but I have to agree with Paelos. The NFL is putting a shit product on the field, and it's got a lot to do with all the idiotic exceptions and rules to who can be hit, when they can be hit and how they can be hit. The fact that there's even an argument about whether or not a particular position player can be hit on a play is just insane. So if it's a fake punt, can the punter still be hit? And if the punter tries to block someone, does the guy that they try to block get a penalty for touching the punter? Defensive play has been godawful this year and it needs to be fixed. Whether that's with letting more people get hit or letting people hit more in practice or what, I don't know. I only know that watching some of these games gets painful. http://www.steelersdepot.com/2013/12/nfl-rulebook-hit-terence-garvin-kevin-huber-steelers-bengals/ Has a pretty nice shot of the point of contact. I am sure there will be sides debunking it and sides holding it up as proof. This should be pretty cut and dry given what has happened throughout the season (see: Gumby Drew Brees). And the punter/kicker rule is only on kicks and only applies to headshots. You are still able to block the punter. This has nothing to do with hitting anyone, it has to do with where the hit occurs or where it ends up. Edit: neck Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2013, 12:35:39 PM I think that's what he was saying, but I'm now a bit confused at the flow a bit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 17, 2013, 12:36:09 PM That's an insane rule. There is literally no way for the human body to contort itself such that it can guarantee it won't contact the head on every single contact possibility. It might as well just say "The punter cannot take any part in the play other than kicking the ball because they are porcelain dolls and we will break them."
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Phildo on December 17, 2013, 12:36:37 PM I don't remember where I read it, but there was a pretty good article not that long ago about how there's a rise in lower-body injuries due to players being afraid of accidentally sliding up into someone's head during a tackle and consequently aiming lower.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on December 17, 2013, 12:45:11 PM I don't remember where I read it, but there was a pretty good article not that long ago about how there's a rise in lower-body injuries due to players being afraid of accidentally sliding up into someone's head during a tackle and consequently aiming lower. Legal hit: (http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-q7EQKn9tm8M/UqTRJAzsXTI/AAAAAAAAEb8/XHT-kTps8fg/s400/gronkhit2.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 17, 2013, 12:47:06 PM Yup that's going to be the norm going forward. But at least their brains won't have been as traumatized after their careers are cut short by knee injuries.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2013, 12:49:12 PM Yup that's going to be the norm going forward. But at least their brains won't have been as traumatized after their careers are cut short by knee injuries. To be fair, a knee injury is a lot better than a brain injury. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 17, 2013, 12:50:23 PM In the long term. But players aren't thinking of the long term (or else they would all just quit now).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ghambit on December 17, 2013, 12:53:50 PM I don't remember where I read it, but there was a pretty good article not that long ago about how there's a rise in lower-body injuries due to players being afraid of accidentally sliding up into someone's head during a tackle and consequently aiming lower. This hit should be illegal (receiver defenseless and unaware, no different then a crackback block [which receivers aren't allowed to do at the line]): (http://cdn1.sbnation.com/imported_assets/1758167/ibiHwjbqkuZ6wR.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2013, 01:06:06 PM They need to get over this concussions shit and the high hits, or the game is going to become unwatchable. I'm already watching less than I used to. I turned off that Detroit game last night simply because it was so stupid. Those are playoff possible teams!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: naum on December 17, 2013, 01:22:34 PM I think there's going to be a big push to make hitting at the knees or below illegal anywhere. Which will put defensive players in an even bigger conundrum. The game moves so fast and TV audience just doesn't appreciate (and I think even ex-player/announcer TV talking heads forget this truth) speed, especially with all the replays that make the play look totally different than when it happened in real time.
And we haven't even discussed line play, for which helmet contact (and low hitting a good bit of the time) happens on every play. It ends up making the competition so arbitrary, the happenstance that a defender making a play just ends up with contact on the wrong body parts. And when defensive players start getting timid, they're not good defensive players anymore. Will it ever devolve into the equivalent of flag football? Hard to see that happening, but the current track is just going to erupt with more of these inconsistencies and arbitrary calls based on position or harm inflicted (i.e, an "illegal" hit where player is not hurt goes unpunished whereas a clean hit that results in a stretcher will most always draw flag and fine). Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 17, 2013, 01:33:42 PM Watching that Gronk play sure makes my balls shrivel up more than the hit on the punter. Legs ain't meant to bend that way.
The NFL is going to have a real problem sooner rather than later. They can't go back on the concussion stuff from a PR standpoint, but it is clearly hurting the on-field product. They need to start by expanding rosters at least another 5 or 6 guys to build depth, then create a developmental league that isn't fucking college. And there needs to be some frank contact re-negotiations with the players' union on the CBA to both provide waiver liabilities for the NFL on the long-term concussion shit as well as sizable increase in the pension plans to adjust for the long-term effects of playing football that no one seems willing to acknowledge outside of lawsuits. So in other words, fucking never. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2013, 01:59:58 PM How many times did you turn on the NFL schedule this season and think to yourself, man these matchups are awful?
How many times did you do that last season? Maybe it's self-selecting memory, but I feel like it's a ton more this year. However, my gut on whether or not defenses are much worse this year is statistically backed up with facts, so maybe I should do some digging. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on December 17, 2013, 03:49:34 PM I'm pretty sure I've said this before; but coming from a rugby background and having started playing murrican football this year, I strongly believe a large part of this problem is technique. It even comes through in the way you guys talk about "hitting" instead of "making a tackle". In both those gifs, the defender had ample time to line up a solid shot at the guys waist/thighs and wrap him up (ok, in Gronk's case it was probably wiser to go for the ankles, because Gronk is hueg). Instead, they just go in at full-pelt to crump the receiver outright. Which is impressive and savagely satisfying, but technically unsafe and irresponsible - and this has to be coming from the way these guys are taught, not some flaw inherent in the rules.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 17, 2013, 04:24:52 PM You are right, their technique is wretched. That's why the NFL did the Heads Up Campaign to teach the youth, and also stop scaring the bejezzus out of their mamas for letting them play.
Still, that generation is 10 years away from even looking at the NFL as rookies, minimum. The players there now are just confused. Why would I want to be a defensive player today? What's to gain? I'm never going to make the money a WR would, and I take all the risks. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2013, 05:41:30 PM I enjoyed this little flub.
(http://i.imgur.com/hK6ZYIa.png) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 17, 2013, 07:31:52 PM NFL confirms hit on Bengal's punter was illegal:
Quote “Huber, he’s a punter. And the key is he’s defenseless throughout the down,” Blandino said. “So even though he’s pursing the play, he still gets defenseless-player protection. You can’t hit him in the head or neck, and you can’t use the crown or forehead parts of the helmet to the body.” http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/12/17/nfl-says-flag-should-have-been-thrown-on-block-that-injured-kevin-huber/ I stand by what I said about him seeking the punter out. For sure he was thinking about the big hit he was going lay on the punter who didn't see him coming. I remember coaches and teammates in high school laughing about a play where one of our players hit the kicker on a kick return and he didn't see it coming. We thought the big hit was great and so did the coaches. They have Mike Tice on locally here on one of the sports radio stations once in a while and he said that they aren't teaching technique anymore. It starts in high school and it continues in college. He said he would see it all the time in rookies who basically had no idea how to form tackle. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 17, 2013, 07:35:19 PM In both those gifs, the defender had ample time to line up a solid shot at the guys waist/thighs and wrap him up (ok, in Gronk's case it was probably wiser to go for the ankles, because Gronk is hueg). Instead, they just go in at full-pelt to crump the receiver outright. When I played football in 7th grade, you were supposed to go for the waist/hips and wrap that motherfucker up. Anything other than attacking his center of gravity meant somebody was going to be running some fucking laps. I so rarely see that kind of form tackling anymore in the NFL. It's all shoulder charges to try to flatten a guy, or shitty arm tackles trying to grab a guy's jersey. I don't know what high school and college coaches are teaching now but it ain't the way it's supposed to be. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 17, 2013, 11:13:10 PM Yeah, that's been the biggest problem for me with the play of the Broncos defense this season. Trying too hard to make a "play" instead of just fucking tackling.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 18, 2013, 02:46:01 AM I'm really starting to wonder why I keep watching the NFL.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 18, 2013, 06:15:29 AM I'm really starting to wonder why I keep watching the NFL. That thought would have been almost sacrilegious a few years ago, now I find college about 100x more entertaining as a sport. Sort of like basketball. That shouldn't happen. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on December 22, 2013, 05:35:12 PM Awesome. Darell Bevell and the utter fucking incompetence of the NFL's 25th rated officiating crew* were enough to sink the Seahawks. Sure glad this was the first game I attended all year.
*just guessing. They were fucking awfu Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 22, 2013, 07:11:05 PM And the Lions lose to the NY Fucking Giants. Lost 5 of their last 6. Eliminated from the playoffs. Time to fucking can Schwartz though I HIGHLY doubt that'll happen. Ford is 109 and the only nutrition he can receive is via coffee enemas. Ford has owned the Lions for 50 barren, starved years, with no Super Bowl appearances at it's last playoff win in 1991. Ford must sustain himself with the tears of Lions fans.
Every year it's the same fucking teams in the playoffs, NONE of which I love and I have to decide which team I despise the least. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 22, 2013, 07:28:32 PM Can we just stop handing out division titles and playoff appearances to shitty divisions like the NFC North?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 22, 2013, 09:48:53 PM Can we just stop handing out division titles and playoff appearances to shitty divisions like the NFC North? I'd be all for that. Don't forget though that 2 of those teams lost their QB's for almost half the season. Both had shitty defenses though. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on December 22, 2013, 10:26:51 PM And the Lions lose to the NY Fucking Giants. Lost 5 of their last 6. Eliminated from the playoffs. Time to fucking can Schwartz though I HIGHLY doubt that'll happen. Ford is 109 and the only nutrition he can receive is via coffee enemas. Ford has owned the Lions for 50 barren, starved years, with no Super Bowl appearances at it's last playoff win in 1991. Ford must sustain himself with the tears of Lions fans. Every year it's the same fucking teams in the playoffs, NONE of which I love and I have to decide which team I despise the least. I think there are a great many fanbases in the NFL and other major leagues that would caution you to not piss on an owner like Ford. It can be a lot worse. Can we just stop handing out division titles and playoff appearances to shitty divisions like the NFC North? You say that but I like the NFC North winner over the Saints at their building and once you win one playoff game you can win either. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on December 23, 2013, 03:48:11 AM In both those gifs, the defender had ample time to line up a solid shot at the guys waist/thighs and wrap him up (ok, in Gronk's case it was probably wiser to go for the ankles, because Gronk is hueg). Instead, they just go in at full-pelt to crump the receiver outright. When I played football in 7th grade, you were supposed to go for the waist/hips and wrap that motherfucker up. Anything other than attacking his center of gravity meant somebody was going to be running some fucking laps. I so rarely see that kind of form tackling anymore in the NFL. It's all shoulder charges to try to flatten a guy, or shitty arm tackles trying to grab a guy's jersey. I don't know what high school and college coaches are teaching now but it ain't the way it's supposed to be. This. I also want to know where they were taught to tackle with your helmet. Fucking stupid. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 23, 2013, 06:19:50 AM Can we just stop handing out division titles and playoff appearances to shitty divisions like the NFC North? I'd be all for that. Don't forget though that 2 of those teams lost their QB's for almost half the season. Both had shitty defenses though. Agreed. Both the Packers and Bears would have been better if their defenses ever decided to show up. The Lions choked the division away, the Vikings are bad all around, the Packers have a shitty defense, and the Bears have an all-time shitty defense. The problem I have with handing out a division title to that garbage is because you will probably have Arizona at 11-5 or 10-6 and missing the playoffs. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 23, 2013, 06:24:03 AM And the Lions lose to the NY Fucking Giants. Lost 5 of their last 6. Eliminated from the playoffs. Time to fucking can Schwartz though I HIGHLY doubt that'll happen. Ford is 109 and the only nutrition he can receive is via coffee enemas. Ford has owned the Lions for 50 barren, starved years, with no Super Bowl appearances at it's last playoff win in 1991. Ford must sustain himself with the tears of Lions fans. Every year it's the same fucking teams in the playoffs, NONE of which I love and I have to decide which team I despise the least. I think there are a great many fanbases in the NFL and other major leagues that would caution you to not piss on an owner like Ford. It can be a lot worse. You're going to have to defend that statement, because I find it ludicrous. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Hoax on December 23, 2013, 09:08:38 AM From an article that came out on Insider this week, ranked Lions as second best potentially open coaching positions behind the Texans:
Quote There's a huge gap between the top two teams and the others in the eyes of league insiders. Detroit and Houston finished among the top two on just about every ballot. Both organizations project stability. Both are known for providing all the resources coaches covet. There's no questioning the Lions' talent. "They have a QB, they have Megatron, a running back, Ndamukong Suh," the GM said. "You just need to improve the back half of your defense. [Team president] Tom Lewand is good to work for. There is an ability from a coaching perspective to probably get the personnel you want. Their ownership is outstanding. There is a degree of patience still." Ownership previously stood by Matt Millen as its top football decision maker for seven losing seasons. Current coach Jim Schwartz has been on the job for five seasons, returning in 2013 after going 4-12 last season. Patience can be frustrating for fans, but coaching candidates covet stability. "The No. 1 place for me would be Detroit with William Clay Ford as your owner," the agent said. An NFL team exec put it this way: "The Fords do things first class behind the scenes and they give you time. Schwartz could have been fired before. They have a great facility, the stadium is nice. The Lions appear to be a leader short of coming through." http://www.ramsondemand.com/threads/ranking-potential-coaching-openings.21787/ Point being there are owners who seem to be more interested than saving money on facilities/contracts than winning. There are owners like Jerry or Al Davis (RIP) who lose touch but insist on overriding football minds. There are owners that have to scapegoat and fire someone every year the results aren't good, creating endless turn over and losing seasons. There are owners who disrespect the traditions of the fans, change the colors, the club name etc. There are investment owners who buy the team just to take out big loans raise the team valuation and sell it. There are owners that seem to hire HC/OC with some new system ala Chip Kelly but then never give them time to implement it so the roster is always in the middle of a tear down to fit a new system. All of those things are a lot worse than a hands off owner that is loyal to a fault. Could be there is stuff I don't know, I'm not from Michigan or anything but he seems ok to me. Never heard anything about unreasonable ticket prices for Lions games or anything like that either. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 23, 2013, 09:33:07 AM Von Miller torn ACL. Not good for a defense that has looked shaky at times this season.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 23, 2013, 01:41:00 PM Von Miller torn ACL. Not good for a defense that has looked shaky at times this season. At times? You mean every Sunday? That being said, they did a decent job without him yesterday. He did go out fairly early. That being said, I'm glad we have at least one less game in the post season. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on December 23, 2013, 02:30:12 PM Speaking of injuries, Romo out for the year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 23, 2013, 05:50:47 PM Speaking of injuries, Romo out for the year. Philly is going to light us up like the Rockefeller Tree. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 25, 2013, 03:09:11 PM Speaking of injuries, Romo out for the year. Philly is going to light us up like the Rockefeller Tree. Yes, but Romo wasn't going to stop that anyway. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Zetleft on December 25, 2013, 04:35:26 PM At least now we will be forced to run this week. Who am I kidding we will still pass 70% of the time. I would almost be fine with missing the playoffs if it meant we can get rid of the coaching staff. But I'd much rather have both, even if our chances to advance in the playoffs are slim to none.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 25, 2013, 06:21:10 PM Here's the funny thing. Philly is more than capable of completely shitting the bed when they think they have a guaranteed win. 48-30 against Minnesota? We're seen wildly different games in two weeks out of them.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 26, 2013, 12:23:47 PM Yeah, there is no guarantee Philly will even show up. Which pretty much sums up this season for every team.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 26, 2013, 01:56:51 PM Ugh, so true. What a terrible year we've had for consistency in the league. Any given Sunday isn't supposed to mean that you have no idea if 70% of the playoff teams even deserve a shot.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 26, 2013, 02:23:12 PM I'm actually pretty positive that at least half the playoff teams are utter shit this year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 27, 2013, 07:11:03 AM Who needs a defense?
Quote @AndrewSiciliano Defense is optional with the 4 teams fighting for NFC North & East titles: Bears (29th), Packers (26th), Eagles (30th), Cowboys (32nd) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 27, 2013, 08:33:08 AM Top Five Defenses in Points Against: Carolina, Seattle, SF, KC, New Orleans
Total Wins - 55 Top Five Offenses in Points: Denver, Philly, Chicago, Dallas, NE Total Wins - 48 But yeah, who needs defense? :oh_i_see: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 27, 2013, 09:11:20 AM You also have to take into account that 2 of those top 5 offenses (Dallas and Chicago) also have two of the worst fucking defenses ever seen in the history of man. And both Denver and NE are pretty suspect at times too. Philly's defense has been decent at best, downright awful most days.
So yes, defense is good. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on December 27, 2013, 12:50:10 PM I actually think it's somewhat the opposite of how it used to be. Defense is well suited to winning a lot of games in the regular season. A solid consistent defensive will win you a lot of games. But in the playoffs, when you are "win or go home" I just feel like it's way too easy to get hosed by some calls on your defensive backs or any of the other rules designed to make it rough on defensive players.
Do you want to rely on not having a string of PI or illegal contact, or an unlucky defenseless player/helmet to helmet call for 3-4 games in a row? The margin for error is small in the playoffs, and all told I'd rather be able to consistently put some points on the board, it leaves less to chance in the current environment. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 27, 2013, 12:57:37 PM Baltimore created a weird outlier last year in that they won a Super Bowl doing absolutely nothing great on either side of the ball. They were dead average on offense yards, defense yards, points, sacks, etc.
The only things they had in their favor were turnover margin and kicking. If that's the model that can win a Super Bowl in a bizarre year, then there's one team that absolutely fits the mold this season: The Indianapolis Colts. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 27, 2013, 01:15:19 PM Flacco had the hot hand during their playoff run with 11 TD passes and no picks.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 27, 2013, 02:21:08 PM No doubt, but there's no predictor on that. That's my point.
It wasn't one thing they did well, it was a QB getting hot at the right time, and Denver absolutely tripping over their own dick. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 27, 2013, 07:55:39 PM Hope I'm not stating the obvious, but I'd put money on a average team with few turnovers than a great team with a lot.
Turnovers KILL you. Time and again we see their effects. Nothing drives me crazier. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 27, 2013, 08:25:56 PM Hope I'm not stating the obvious, but I'd put money on a average team with few turnovers than a great team with a lot. Turnovers KILL you. Time and again we see their effects. Nothing drives me crazier. Then you'd want to bet Indy and not Denver. In the NFC, you'd take Carolina or Seattle, but not New Orleans. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 28, 2013, 12:41:17 PM Yup. I love Denver, but the mistakes on turnovers (which have thankfully gotten way better as the season progressed) and defense have me not convinced we'll do much in the post-season.
It's more of a sign that there isn't any single statistic that you can point to. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on December 28, 2013, 11:25:53 PM Guessing the Eagles punter is going to be really, really bored tomorrow.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 29, 2013, 03:34:51 PM In case you missed the PLAY OF THE DAY.
(http://cdn2.sbnation.com/assets/3781629/packersderpTD.gif) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 29, 2013, 04:43:12 PM Look out whoever plays the Packers.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 29, 2013, 04:52:05 PM That would be the Niners since the Seahawks won.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 29, 2013, 05:00:53 PM Niners AT Packers even.
The Broncos will face Chargers, Chiefs or Colts. In order of preference: 1. Chiefs, 2. Colts, 3. Chargers. Edit: Indeed, Random Raiders Fan, Indeed. (http://i.imgur.com/mJJDv4y.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 29, 2013, 05:14:12 PM That would be the Niners since the Seahawks won. Maybe this time they'll remember Colin can run. :grin: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 29, 2013, 05:41:43 PM Doesn't need to if he's throwing for 400+ yards :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on December 29, 2013, 06:20:44 PM That would be the Niners since the Seahawks won. Maybe this time they'll remember Colin can run. :grin: The 49ers barely remember that this season. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on December 29, 2013, 06:31:11 PM And yet he still managed to rush for 500 yards.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 29, 2013, 08:27:11 PM I really wish the Cowboys would just lose a game, and not decide to fucking rip out hearts in the last second of every meaningful game.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on December 29, 2013, 09:02:05 PM Kyle Orton. You had to know something bad was going to happen.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on December 29, 2013, 09:25:35 PM The Cowboys disappointing their fans in such soul crushing ways warms my heart almost as much as when the Eagles do it to THEIR fans. Please, please, please let the Eagles lose in some similarly wonderful fashion in their playoff game, football gods.
Eli staying in when he rolled his ankle in order to throw one last pick for the road made me all, "Oh, you big lug!" for some reason. You pad your worst-season-ever stats, Eli. You pad the shit out of them! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on December 30, 2013, 01:32:39 AM Good games yesterday. In what has otherwise been a pretty ho hum season I'm glad the scheduling of division games late at least paid off.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on December 30, 2013, 05:59:55 AM http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000305869/article/rob-chudzinski-fired-by-cleveland-browns
Good God my team is just horrible. I mean what place does this after only one season and with no qb? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on December 30, 2013, 06:36:55 AM Factory of Sadness
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 30, 2013, 07:04:06 AM Saw something today that said part of the reason Chud was fired was because the team told him to cut somebody to set an example and he told them no.
Also, Frazier is out in MN. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on December 30, 2013, 07:19:29 AM Shanahan is out in D.C.
Rex got to keep his job with the Jets, which he kind of deserved, considering he took the team to .500 while wearing fucking clownshoes. Now if they can actually hire some goddamn talent in the off-season, they might be competitive next year. At least I have the solace of knowing they had a better season than the giants and rubbing that in the face of one of my Big Blue friends who boldly predicted after their first win this season that the Giants would end up with a better record than the Jets. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 30, 2013, 07:55:36 AM Yes we can all take solace in the fact the Giants were terrible.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on December 30, 2013, 08:39:11 AM Went 7-3 in their last 10 games though, and you were all still a little baffled they wouldn't go away for a while, but never really dragged their own fans (at least not the ones I know) into hoping for anything, and got to crush another fan base's dreams, so all and all, not the worst season. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on December 30, 2013, 08:44:53 AM Rex deserved to keep his job, he's worked miracles with that clown car.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 30, 2013, 09:07:33 AM Schwartz out in Detroit. Something needed to be done there. That team has no excuse for not winning that crappy division.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on December 30, 2013, 10:19:05 AM Niners AT Packers even. The Broncos will face Chargers, Chiefs or Colts. In order of preference: 1. Chiefs, 2. Colts, 3. Chargers. Edit: Indeed, Random Raiders Fan, Indeed. (http://i.imgur.com/mJJDv4y.jpg) My favorite part of this is the luck of utterly undeserved smugness. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 30, 2013, 10:42:14 AM Schwartz out in Detroit. Something needed to be done there. That team has no excuse for not winning that crappy division. THANK GOD. I was his biggest fan, after his success with the Titans and instilling an aggressive spirit at the Lions. But he's a fucking tard of a Head Coach. They went from division leader to out of the playoffs in like two games. The Lions have talent, now they need discipline. This firing keeps me a Lions and NFL fan. Rex Ryan deserves another season. He's kind of a goober, but overall an excellent coach. Shanahan needs to retire. I don't want to see his monkey-faced scowl on the sidelines any more. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Zetleft on December 30, 2013, 11:05:54 AM Surprising no one Schiano and the GM are out in Tampa. Unfortunately Garrett hasn't been fired yet neither has Kiffin, and he REALLY needs to go and die or something.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Merusk on December 30, 2013, 11:19:33 AM Having spent the last 20 years rooting for the Browns, Steelers, Dallas, Washington and half-heartedly for the Bengals I would like to announce that in the 2014-5 season I will be rooting for the Saints with gusto.
Make your bets now. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on December 30, 2013, 11:51:12 AM Have we accounted for all our Bears fans today?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on December 30, 2013, 11:58:14 AM Surprising no one Schiano and the GM are out in Tampa. Oh, thank the football gods. Now we just need Ireland to go in Miami. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on December 30, 2013, 12:03:47 PM Jerry Jones has to put some feelers out first to find out if there any any coaches left dumb enough to work for him.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 30, 2013, 12:16:12 PM Jerry Jones has to put some feelers out first to find out if there any any coaches left dumb enough to work for him. Not any ones that can win. He could hire Lane Kiffin so he and his Dad can be reunited again. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on December 30, 2013, 12:18:26 PM Jerry Jones has to put some feelers out first to find out if there any any coaches left dumb enough to work for him. Not any ones that can win. He could hire Lane Kiffin so he and his Dad can be reunited again. That would be glorious. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Fordel on December 30, 2013, 01:23:52 PM In case you missed the PLAY OF THE DAY. I still do not understand how this happens, at the NFL level. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on December 30, 2013, 04:47:20 PM Having spent the last 20 years rooting for the Browns, Steelers, Dallas, Washington and half-heartedly for the Bengals I would like to announce that in the 2014-5 season I will be rooting for the Saints with gusto. Make your bets now. The team with about -$16M in cap space? Have we accounted for all our Bears fans today? Still here, feeling a bit glum. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on December 30, 2013, 04:55:22 PM In case you missed the PLAY OF THE DAY. I still do not understand how this happens, at the NFL level. Yeah well when it involves the qb, who knows if that was a fumble or a tuck thing? And then if someone would have hit the packer picking it up it would have been unnecessary roughness. So really... I can't say I am shocked. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 30, 2013, 05:08:46 PM You play until a whistle. Regardless.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on December 30, 2013, 06:08:58 PM At least tag the guy.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 30, 2013, 06:37:40 PM How is that a fumble? Oh, right Packers. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 30, 2013, 06:41:02 PM It's a fumble in every game now. They let that go more often than not.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on December 30, 2013, 06:44:57 PM A fumble that sails almost 20 yards? Seems legit.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 30, 2013, 07:18:21 PM If you are hit with the hand going backward on the ball, it's going to go forward.
They reviewed it, it wasn't close. The ball being out isn't really in dispute. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 30, 2013, 07:18:52 PM Did you watch the game? The bears defender slaps the ball out of his hand before making forward motion. It was a fumble.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on December 30, 2013, 07:22:11 PM Did you watch the game? The bears defender slaps the ball out of his hand before making forward motion. It was a fumble. The defender also pushed his arm forward which by sheer fluke of chance hit the ball square on and sent it forward instead of up/down/caddywumpus. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 30, 2013, 07:28:01 PM Yeah. I can't get mad at the defenders for thinking it was an incomplete pass, but TAG THE PLAYER ANYWAY. For the same reason that Boykin kept playing is the same reason that SOME defender should run up and tag him. Just. In. Case.
It's more proof of the unprincipled play in the NFL these days. Hits over tackles, etc. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on December 30, 2013, 08:08:37 PM It looked to me like Boykin initially sprints to the ball thinking it was live, but didn't see anyone else acting like the play was still live so he gave up on it and just picked the ball up to hand to the official. Then Rogers realizes there was no whistle so probably said something like 'Dude, run!' and thus Green Bay gets a freebie.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Fordel on December 30, 2013, 09:40:00 PM Basically, I'd expect that kind of silly from a little league game, not full time pro players.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 30, 2013, 09:41:08 PM It looked to me like Boykin initially sprints to the ball thinking it was live, but didn't see anyone else acting like the play was still live so he gave up on it and just picked the ball up to hand to the official. Then Rogers realizes there was no whistle so probably said something like 'Dude, run!' and thus Green Bay gets a freebie. Apparently the sideline was radioing to Rodgers like crazy saying the ball was live. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on December 30, 2013, 10:34:22 PM And you just know the refs are watching this unfold, screaming inside their heads, "IT'S STILL LIVE YOU MORONS."
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Fordel on December 31, 2013, 12:43:21 AM Are NFL refs not allowed to say the play is still live? Like in Hockey I'll see Refs tell players stuck in the boards to 'Keep it moving' or "Play on, Play on" when they are looking for a whistle.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on December 31, 2013, 12:55:56 AM Are NFL refs not allowed to say the play is still live? Like in Hockey I'll see Refs tell players stuck in the boards to 'Keep it moving' or "Play on, Play on" when they are looking for a whistle. They say the play is still live by, you know, not having blown the whistle. When they tell players in hockey to move the puck they are saying "I'm can call you for delay of game if you keep the puck pinned against the boards here." It's a warning, not friendly advice. I'd think saying something would probably benefit one team more than the other too, which is likely something they want to avoid. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on December 31, 2013, 01:07:06 AM It was remarkable restraint on the refs' part to not blow a whistle. The only problem with that play is that there were only two people on the field (besides the refs) that didn't have their heads up their asses. It was pretty symbolic of a once dominant Bears defense that they pretty much lost their playoff chances because nobody bothered to scoop the damn ball. A Lovie Smith team would have never let that ball sit there. Kinda funny how their offensive/defensive fortunes have reversed so dramatically. And even more strange that Lovie Smith doesn't have a job with some other NFL team right now as a defensive coordinator.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on December 31, 2013, 02:11:00 AM What with all the firings yesterday I wouldn't be surprised to see Lovie Smith back on the sideline next year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on December 31, 2013, 02:26:48 AM So holy shit, my Packers make the playoffs AND get a home game. THE FUCK? As for that fumbley wumbley, I'm pretty sure that since all turnovers are reviewed, the refs err on the side of "it's a turnover" more often than not since they can review it. Better to get it right after the fact than blow a quick whistle then watch your failure light up the highlight reels for the next two weeks while one fan base blames you for all their collective woes. I think both the Packers and the Eagles are going to lose their home playoff games.
Also, just absolutely tickled pink that 1) the Ravens didn't make the playoffs and 2) there was a few hours there where it looked like FUCKING PITTSBURGH might make the playoffs. I mean, what does it say about this season that a team that start 0-6 still had a shot at a wild card right up until the last minute of the next to last game of the fucking season? It says we don't need any more fucking wild card teams. I hadn't seen the list of firings until I got here, but it was a bloody one. Chud should not have been fired in Cleveland - he didn't draft Wheedon, who basically proved he's not an NFL QB and he didn't teach Hoyer how not to fucking slide. That team was better than their record indicates. Frazier should have been fired, after taking a playoff team and turning them into a joke with an improved roster. Schwarz should have been fired because his team isn't in the playoffs due solely to lack of discipline - a few less roughing the passer calls and that team wins the division. There's no reason the Packers should have been able to make up the ground on Detroirt (Chicago at least had the excuse of missing Cutler). Schiano not only should have been fired, he should never be allowed to coach again after the complete fucking drama queen trainwreck he made down there. At least Glennon looks a decent QB. I still think Rex Ryan should have been fired last year but somehow that team won 8 games with fucking nothing this year. How soon after the Super Bowl do you think Sanchez gets shitcanned? I'm still not sure about Shanahan. Clearly there was not a lot going right there this year and being under the salary cap penalty didn't help. The sad part is that RGIII is going to have to start from scratch with a new offensive scheme next year and if he isn't healed, it's going to be rough on the kid. Being hair trigger on that sort of thing with a young talent who is still learning can backfire big time. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MediumHigh on December 31, 2013, 06:15:40 AM Yeah. I can't get mad at the defenders for thinking it was an incomplete pass, but TAG THE PLAYER ANYWAY. For the same reason that Boykin kept playing is the same reason that SOME defender should run up and tag him. Just. In. Case. It's more proof of the unprincipled play in the NFL these days. Hits over tackles, etc. Sounds like proof of "unnecessary roughness" being taken seriously. Doesn't have the ball? 9 time out of 10 any attempt to touch them is late hit, unnecessary roughness, roughing the passer, pass interference, illegal block, etc etc. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 31, 2013, 06:25:21 AM Are NFL refs not allowed to say the play is still live? Like in Hockey I'll see Refs tell players stuck in the boards to 'Keep it moving' or "Play on, Play on" when they are looking for a whistle. No, they are not. You know a ball is live because the ref will throw a beanbag where it was fumbled, but in this case it was so far behind the play, nobody could see it. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 31, 2013, 06:51:33 AM Yeah. I can't get mad at the defenders for thinking it was an incomplete pass, but TAG THE PLAYER ANYWAY. For the same reason that Boykin kept playing is the same reason that SOME defender should run up and tag him. Just. In. Case. It's more proof of the unprincipled play in the NFL these days. Hits over tackles, etc. Sounds like proof of "unnecessary roughness" being taken seriously. Doesn't have the ball? 9 time out of 10 any attempt to touch them is late hit, unnecessary roughness, roughing the passer, pass interference, illegal block, etc etc. Read what I wrote again. Tag the player. Put one hand on him so he's down, just in case. You'll see vets do it all the time. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MediumHigh on December 31, 2013, 07:12:57 AM I'm not saying they shouldn't have done that, I just don't blame them for not doing it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on December 31, 2013, 07:13:33 AM By rule I think he'd have to be on the ground for a tag to work. He's standing the whole time in that play. You would have to literally walk up to him and hold him, impeding forward progress is my understanding.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on December 31, 2013, 07:45:56 AM By rule I think he'd have to be on the ground for a tag to work. He's standing the whole time in that play. You would have to literally walk up to him and hold him, impeding forward progress is my understanding. This. A defender would have had to tackle him since he picked it up while standing there. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: kaid on December 31, 2013, 08:18:08 AM How is that a fumble? Oh, right Packers. :awesome_for_real: Actually if you look at a good close up of it the play was clearly a fumble. Basically the guy trying to sack rodgers hit him from behind the ball was out of his and and he just kinda derp pushed forward flailing combined with the momentum made it look like a lame duck pass attempt. About the only person in position to tell it was a fumble was rodgers and the refs so rodgers was pretty heads up when the whistle was not blowing to tell his player to pick the ball up and run. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 31, 2013, 08:23:10 AM By rule I think he'd have to be on the ground for a tag to work. He's standing the whole time in that play. You would have to literally walk up to him and hold him, impeding forward progress is my understanding. Okay, clearly using "tag" was a bit of an underestimation. The point is that the players did NOTHING when two players, including one of the more intelligent players in the game starts running..... you do SOMETHING. You act like you give a shit. The bears played like shit on at least two huge plays. This one was just the worse of the two. Unprincipled players who gave up. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: naum on December 31, 2013, 10:01:15 AM Also, just absolutely tickled pink that 1) the Ravens didn't make the playoffs and 2) there was a few hours there where it looked like FUCKING PITTSBURGH might make the playoffs. I mean, what does it say about this season that a team that start 0-6 still had a shot at a wild card right up until the last minute of the next to last game of the fucking season? It says we don't need any more fucking wild card teams. And in fitting fashion for the season, the NFL confirmed that officials on the KC-SD game flubbed 2 calls that most definitely would have put Pittsburgh in the playoffs (http://msn.foxsports.com/watch/fox-football-daily/video/pereira-steelers-should-be-in-playoffs-123013). See Mike Pereira (https://twitter.com/MikePereira) Twitter threads for more. Still, Steelers at 8-8 don't deserve to go anyway but I am pleased that they finished the season strong instead of folding up like the Browns, Falcons, Lions, Bucs, etc.… Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on December 31, 2013, 11:17:50 AM What with all the firings yesterday I wouldn't be surprised to see Lovie Smith back on the sideline next year. Word is Tampa Bay is interested. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on December 31, 2013, 11:56:36 AM By rule I think he'd have to be on the ground for a tag to work. He's standing the whole time in that play. You would have to literally walk up to him and hold him, impeding forward progress is my understanding. Okay, clearly using "tag" was a bit of an underestimation. The point is that the players did NOTHING when two players, including one of the more intelligent players in the game starts running..... you do SOMETHING. You act like you give a shit. The bears played like shit on at least two huge plays. This one was just the worse of the two. Unprincipled players who gave up. I'm gonna disagree with you here, because there was no one near him and/or looking at him once he started running, and the only way he was going to be "down" was if someone actually ran over to tackle him after he casually picked up the ball (and given everyone on BOTH teams kinda jogged to a stop before the ball carrier took off, there was basically no one who was going to be fast enough to get to him once he DID start running). The way defenders have been hammered to not do anything even remotely sketchy this season is not going to encourage that. If you watch the gif, there are a few Bears that flinch in an "oh shit, fuck!" way, but there was not going to be anyone able to get him. Once everyone (everyone, on both sides) derped about the ball being dead instead of live, the Packers basically had their touchdown, and it was actually a fairly understandable derp. It's a funny, oh-man-duuuuuuuh play, but I can't really sneer at the Bears for not tackling a guy who was just as convinced they were that the play was over. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 31, 2013, 12:06:27 PM There are plenty of Bears that were playing back (CB/Safety) that could have reacted given where the ball is, and given the position to the sideline, there's plenty of room for them to have done stuff defensively that would not have gotten them in trouble. Given how many defensive players go for hits instead of tackles, I'm going with unprincipled. Especially paired with the Cobb TD later in the game. Poor play on the bears part on both of those. We see defensive players run with what they presume is a fumble or an int all the time even with the refs are blowing the whistle like crazy. This time the bears did not react well even when there was no whistle.
The play looked for everything like an incomplete pass. I even mentioned before (possibly in IRC) that I can't really fault for them initially thinking that was what happened, but the fact that most of the bears just stared as Rodgers and Boykins skipped hand in hand into the endzone just makes me facepalm. I'm still not sure about Shanahan. Clearly there was not a lot going right there this year and being under the salary cap penalty didn't help. The sad part is that RGIII is going to have to start from scratch with a new offensive scheme next year and if he isn't healed, it's going to be rough on the kid. Being hair trigger on that sort of thing with a young talent who is still learning can backfire big time. The problem with Shanny is that he wants too much control over the team. And he's not a good GM. That is inevitably what caused his downfall in Denver as well. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on December 31, 2013, 12:17:05 PM I assume you mean undisciplined rather than unprincipled...
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on December 31, 2013, 12:30:31 PM I've made my decision. (Yes.)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Belasco on December 31, 2013, 05:36:29 PM Have we accounted for all our Bears fans today? If Lovie Smith was still the Bears' coach, that LB takes it the other way for 6! :why_so_serious: I know it's only been one season, but I get this weird feeling Trestman's teams will simply have the inverse problem that Smith's teams had. Lovie got canned because he couldn't find an OC to run a halfway decent offense to go with his top ten turnover-generating defense. Trestman, to his credit, already has the top 10 offense in place, but it seems like he'll have a problem getting an average NFL defense on the field. So in five years (or the length of Cutler's new contract, whichever is shorter) after Trestman misses the playoffs in most of them, he'll get canned for a "defensive-minded coach that gets back to Bears football". And the cycle of 7-9 to 9-7 seasons will continue. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 02, 2014, 07:57:10 AM Cutler signed through 2020. (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/281308/bears-bring-back-jay-cutler-on-7-year-deal)
Edit: Lovie Smith in at Tampa (http://www.rotoworld.com/headlines/nfl/281294/buccaneers-hiring-lovie-smith-as-head-coach) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 02, 2014, 08:36:11 AM Lovie should do well in Tampa, he just needs to get a good OC in place and they look like a team that can contend straight away.
I'm ok with Cutler being re-signed. There are quarterbacks I'd rather have, but equally there are plenty of starting quarterbacks far worse than him. The guy is tough, and if he can give cover while we pick up someone good in the second round and polish them to greatness I'd be ok. The Bears need to focus on sorting out the D, the fact that they don't have to worry about a QB is a good thing for the offseason hurley-burley. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 02, 2014, 08:41:47 AM there is going to be some REALLY bad QB play next year. The FA market is paper thin.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 02, 2014, 08:44:06 AM Bears have also re-signed Matt Slauson and Tim Jennings to four-year contracts; I'm pleased with both of those moves too. Glad the front office isn't dicking around and is keeping talent in-house.
Now we just need to see about getting some safeties who aren't terrible, and pick up someone for the DL. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 02, 2014, 10:16:15 AM Cleveland Browns interviewing Josh McDaniels (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10229978/josh-mcdaniels-interview-cleveland-browns-head-coaching-position).
Factory of sadness, indeed. Why? Why does this asshole continue to get shots at a head coaching position? They might as well hire Mike Martz as their OC and make sure that whoever they draft to be their next QB of the future gets well and truly fucking killed before week 4. Josh McDaniels is a fucking cancer on the NFL. He's also the anal ferret that was responsible for making Tim Goddamn Tebow a first round draft pick. I am so sorry, Cleveland fans. SO. SO. SORRY. Re-signing Cutler was the right thing to do. He put up HUGE numbers in Trestman's offense, he now has an offensive line that can protect him - he just needs to survive one season without fracturing like glass. It's not like there was ANYTHING that might be available in the offseason that was even remotely like a talented, proven QB - just lots of retreads like Schaub and unknown quantities like Cousins. For only $50 million in guaranteed money - I'd have done that. Now they need to figure out what the fuck happened to their defense because HOLY SHIT, that defense was bad. Lovie Smith in Tampa is going to be a significant upgrade. The defense will flourish, Glennon looks a good enough QB if they can just find an offensive system that works and some durable weapons. Kubiak is free. :grin: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 02, 2014, 10:31:34 AM Guess Johnny Football is headed to Cleveland if McDaniels lands the job. :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 02, 2014, 10:43:21 AM Blown ACL in week 3. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 02, 2014, 10:54:02 AM The New England Belichick tree is poison. The fact people haven't realized this still is amazing to me. Shall we play fun examples?
Romeo Crennel - Where's he working now? Arbys? Jim Schwartz - lulz Detroit Nick Saban - great college, terrible in the NFL Al Groh - so bad that even a god-awful program like Georgia Tech fired him. Josh McDaniels - let's see, he drafted Tebow #1 who is now an ESPN analyst, he was fired from the Broncos, he was fired from the Rams as an OC, and now he's back riding Big Belli's coattails. He's a fool. Eric Mangini - already did the Browns failure, and now he's some nebulous analyst position for offense on the 49ers. Not that the offense has improved at all this year, in fact I think it's regressed. Oh and now the NFL is dumb enough to hire ANOTHER poisoned tree guy in Bill O'Brien? Ok Houston, just spend a draft pick on one of these QB's like Bridgewater who I think will take at least 2 years to adapt to the speed of the NFL, in addition to putting on more size so he doesn't get murdered by guys like Robert Mathis. Then, expect a college coach from a school that went 15-9 in one of the biggest joke conferences in CFB to waltz into a division that's been owned by Indy for the last 10 years, with one of the best coaches in the NFL and best young QBs? It's insane. The Houston GM should have been fired right along with the coach. This is absolutely his fault. He's been around since 2006, and he's done absolutely fuck-all to make that franchise a contender for an AFC title. What's their claim to fame? Beating Cincy twice in a wild card game in his tenure? Really? It's madness that some of these GM's continue to coast especially when they've already had ample time to get the QB situation right. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 02, 2014, 10:56:20 AM One of the happiest days as a Broncos fan:
(http://www.joshmcdanielssucks.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/McDaniels-Fired.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 02, 2014, 11:30:39 AM Who is that?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on January 02, 2014, 11:33:21 AM I think it's McDaniels leaving the building with the box of crap from his office.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on January 02, 2014, 11:59:25 AM Oh and now the NFL is dumb enough to hire ANOTHER poisoned tree guy in Bill O'Brien? Ok Houston, just spend a draft pick on one of these QB's like Bridgewater who I think will take at least 2 years to adapt to the speed of the NFL, in addition to putting on more size so he doesn't get murdered by guys like Robert Mathis. Then, expect a college coach from a school that went 15-9 in one of the biggest joke conferences in CFB to waltz into a division that's been owned by Indy for the last 10 years, with one of the best coaches in the NFL and best young QBs? Bill O'Brien did a good job at Penn State given the circumstances.Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 02, 2014, 12:01:21 PM He did a good enough job to get a better contract or college job. I don't think he did a good enough job to deserve a head coaching position at the NFL level. Almost nobody deserves that shot, and I still believe the only recent coach to make the jump directly and win a Super Bowl is Switzer.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on January 02, 2014, 12:23:42 PM He was the Patriots OC, as you listed above, and plenty of NFL coordinators have made the move to head coach and then making it to a Super Bowl. In other words if he was still the Patriots OC and was hired would that be any different?
The closest to Barry Switzer is Jim Harbaugh who made it to a Super Bowl, but even he had some NFL coaching experience (as QB coach of the Raiders) before eventually getting an NFL head coaching position. Switzer never had any NFL coaching experience before being hired, though you could argue he was simply riding the coattails of the team Jimmy Johnson coached and built. Edit: The closest to Barry Switzer in recent years that is Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 02, 2014, 12:39:07 PM I think it's McDaniels leaving the building with the box of crap from his office. Indeed. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on January 02, 2014, 01:30:02 PM Seems kind of odd that the Bucs would hire a head coach before a GM. Usually GMs want to hire their own coaches. In any case Smith should be a hell of a lot better than that idiot Schiano, though I have my doubts that Jeff Tedford will be an effective OC since he has zero NFL experience.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on January 02, 2014, 01:34:30 PM I know a lot of old guys who sit near me at Cal games who would agree. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 02, 2014, 01:35:28 PM He was the Patriots OC, as you listed above, and plenty of NFL coordinators have made the move to head coach and then making it to a Super Bowl. In other words if he was still the Patriots OC and was hired would that be any different? The closest to Barry Switzer is Jim Harbaugh who made it to a Super Bowl, but even he had some NFL coaching experience (as QB coach of the Raiders) before eventually getting an NFL head coaching position. Switzer never had any NFL coaching experience before being hired, though you could argue he was simply riding the coattails of the team Jimmy Johnson coached and built. No, it wouldn't matter if he was the Patriots OC the whole time to me, as that whole tree is garbage. Belichick runs that team. It's been proven time and again that his assistants are basically inept outside the confines of that job in the NFL. This is more of an indictment of that tree than the college coach thing. However, I don't believe in college head coaches making the jump to NFL head coach either if your goal is winning a championship for that team. John, the NFL coach for 15 years, took down his brother, the guy with 15 years of college coaching experience. McCarthy has 20 years of NFL coaching. Coughlin actually jumped from Boston College to Jacksonville, but he didn't win there, he won 13 years later in New York. Belichick has coached exclusively in the league for almost 40 years. Sean Peyton's been in the NFL since 1997. Tomlin has been in the NFL since 2001. Dungy coached exclusively in the NFL since 1981. Cowher exclusively since 1985. Gruden since 1992. Basically once you go to the NFL, you need to stay there. Coughlin being the recent outlier, but not with the team that hired him back into the NFL. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on January 02, 2014, 04:21:35 PM He was the Patriots OC, as you listed above, and plenty of NFL coordinators have made the move to head coach and then making it to a Super Bowl. In other words if he was still the Patriots OC and was hired would that be any different? The closest to Barry Switzer is Jim Harbaugh who made it to a Super Bowl, but even he had some NFL coaching experience (as QB coach of the Raiders) before eventually getting an NFL head coaching position. Switzer never had any NFL coaching experience before being hired, though you could argue he was simply riding the coattails of the team Jimmy Johnson coached and built. No, it wouldn't matter if he was the Patriots OC the whole time to me, as that whole tree is garbage. Belichick runs that team. It's been proven time and again that his assistants are basically inept outside the confines of that job in the NFL. This is more of an indictment of that tree than the college coach thing. They were discussing this on sports radio in Boston today. The thought is that all these coaches try to be Belichick and not their own guy. Secondly none of them have Tom Brady playing QB... Bill O'brien did a pretty darn good at Penn State considering the circumstances, and I like him telling the 'Paterno faction' to go fuck themselves in a recent interview he did. Anyone left who defends Paterno needs to have their face punched. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 02, 2014, 04:50:10 PM I agree, don't mistake my assessment of O'Brien as him doing a bad job with the hand he's dealt. I just think people are wildly overvaluing how that's going to translate to the NFL Head Coaching position with a GM that's not very good, and a team that's never had any real success in the last decade.
He'd be just fine in another college job, but 18 year old kids and 24 year old millionaires are totally different when it comes to coaching. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on January 03, 2014, 10:24:56 AM Net Yards per Passing Attempt Regular Season 2013 (http://www.steelersdepot.com/2014/01/2013-nfl-regular-season-stats-adjusted-net-yards-per-passing-attempt-differential)
I don't know how Seattle won't walk over everybody on their way to NY. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 03, 2014, 10:44:07 AM That's an interesting chunk of statistics right there.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 03, 2014, 10:59:32 AM Net Yards per Passing Attempt Regular Season 2013 (http://www.steelersdepot.com/2014/01/2013-nfl-regular-season-stats-adjusted-net-yards-per-passing-attempt-differential) I don't know how Seattle won't walk over everybody on their way to NY. If you're a defensive coach, you want to take away the run and the short to medium passing game. That means being hyper aggressive is the way to beat Seattle. You have to take the crowd out of it and roll the dice on your blitz packages. The Seattle offensive line isn't good enough to keep Wilson tidy if he has to hold the ball long. If you press up on coverage, get aggressive, and do it without offering easy blitz slants or dump offs, you can win that game. Yes, you might get beat over the top once, but Wilson's passer rating over 30 yards isn't good. You have to live with that, because if you don't you'll bleed to death by 1000 cuts. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on January 04, 2014, 10:00:47 PM lol eagles
FOOTBALL SEASON A SUCCESS Actually, speaking of lols, wtf happened in the Chiefs/Colts game? I didn't get to listen to the second half. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on January 04, 2014, 10:17:12 PM Luck stopped throwing INTs.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on January 04, 2014, 10:21:35 PM Luck stopped throwing INTs. He was still throwing them during the comeback. Biggest thing was the Chefs losing starters (and their backups) to injuries every third play in the second half. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on January 04, 2014, 10:45:03 PM Sounds like Blood Bowl!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 04, 2014, 10:56:29 PM I was watching the Chiefs game and when they got up by 28 points, I just started fast forwarding the DVR. What... the... fuck? I started watching again when it got to be 41-38 and suddenly Indy wins and I tivoed through one of the greatest collapses/comebacks in history?
Also, can everyone stop fucking talking about the goddamn Eagles this year? Yes, they are a good offense but they ain't contenders yet. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on January 05, 2014, 02:13:48 AM I thought the Chiefs lost because everyone on their team got a concussion. :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on January 05, 2014, 10:15:06 AM Dear StateFarm: The superfans were funny 25 years ago, they are not anymore.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on January 05, 2014, 11:42:46 AM They really need to figure out a way to make this "possession going to the ground" rule more consistent and predictable.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on January 05, 2014, 01:22:39 PM Uh, Chargers? WAT? Oh wait, Norv Turner isn't the coach anymore!
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 05, 2014, 01:33:51 PM Don't remind me who is the Chargers HC. :x
Mind you, I think I would rather play the Chargers than the Colts. I will enjoy Colts upsetting the Pats at home that way the Broncos don't have to play the Pats. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on January 05, 2014, 01:55:35 PM Yeah but you aren't gonna face the Pats cause you'll lose to the Chargers.. :grin:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 05, 2014, 02:05:03 PM Sure.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on January 05, 2014, 04:56:41 PM And... Green Bay loses another big game because they don't know how to play FUCKING CONTAIN DEFENSE.....
I feel better now. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on January 05, 2014, 05:25:04 PM The Packers seriously need to look into what they are putting in their Gatorade. The injuries this year to their starters were ridiculous.
Also, first 6 rounds of the draft should be defense. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on January 05, 2014, 05:32:10 PM They need to hire a new DC. Capers is one of the greats but their defense has gotten worse since the Superbowl year, not better. And they need to bring in some god damn talent.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on January 05, 2014, 06:44:16 PM They need to hire a new DC. Capers is one of the greats but their defense has gotten worse since the Superbowl year, not better. And they need to bring in some god damn talent. It's not Capers. It's the personnel. The calls were solid. It was the mental errors that killed them. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 05, 2014, 08:56:36 PM So many times where they went for the big hit/big play instead of just TACKLING, too.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 06, 2014, 06:33:52 AM There needs to be a challenge to the cameramen to see if they can put Jim Harbaugh on camera when he's not bitching or throwing a tantrum like a child.
I loathe him. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on January 06, 2014, 07:06:03 AM So many times where they went for the big hit/big play instead of just TACKLING, too. You've just described 90% of NFL players. I still want to know where football players are taught to tackle with their helmets. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 06, 2014, 07:10:04 AM You've just described 90% of NFL players. I still want to know where football players are taught to tackle with their helmets. ESPN Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on January 06, 2014, 07:40:48 AM There needs to be a challenge to the cameramen to see if they can put Jim Harbaugh on camera when he's not bitching or throwing a tantrum like a child. I loathe him. This. That guy seriously thinks his players do not commit penalties. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 06, 2014, 08:38:48 AM The Packers lost because their defensive backfield sucks monkey ass. If they could get just 1 player, it should be a safety, someone that can cover the middle of the field and quarterback the DB's. You know, someone like Charles Woodson. There are just too many you guys in that area who miss coverages. Plus, not having our best pass rusher for a good portion of the season didn't help. Something needs to be done on that side of the ball for sure and they need new trainers because there were way too many injuries this year. Still, considering our best player was out for 7 games, we had a rookie left tackle and an undrafted free agent right tackle for much of the season, we did a lot better than should have been expected. Didn't hurt that our division is full of chokers.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: naum on January 06, 2014, 08:44:50 AM Quote Congratulations to the Cleveland Browns for continuing to be the most recent Ohio NFL team to win a playoff game. #FactoryOfSadness @ramzy (https://twitter.com/ramzy/status/419938538931896320) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on January 06, 2014, 08:45:08 AM Hahaha
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 06, 2014, 09:07:52 AM So many times where they went for the big hit/big play instead of just TACKLING, too. You've just described 90% of NFL players. I still want to know where football players are taught to tackle with their helmets. YES EXACTLY. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on January 06, 2014, 09:38:37 AM So many times where they went for the big hit/big play instead of just TACKLING, too. You've just described 90% of NFL players. I still want to know where football players are taught to tackle with their helmets. This is seriously about 80% of the reason the Seahawks D is effective. Watch them tackle- you rarely see someone bounce off because he flew in sideways trying to blow someone up. They ALL wrap up and drag people to the ground. It is a joy to behold for a coach at heart :awesome_for_real: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on January 06, 2014, 09:49:52 AM There needs to be a challenge to the cameramen to see if they can put Jim Harbaugh on camera when he's not bitching or throwing a tantrum like a child. This. That guy seriously thinks his players do not commit penalties.I loathe him. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on January 06, 2014, 10:04:27 AM Quote Congratulations to the Cleveland Browns for continuing to be the most recent Ohio NFL team to win a playoff game. #FactoryOfSadness Don't remember who tweeted it, but both the Bengals' and KC's last playoffs wins were against the Houston Oilers. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 06, 2014, 02:16:50 PM Phins have released Mike Sherman. I think this is for the best.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on January 06, 2014, 05:54:39 PM You've just described 90% of NFL players. I still want to know where football players are taught to tackle with their helmets. I'm not sure you really appreciate the speed at which things happen on the field. Hitting someone with your body is the initiation of contact. Wrapping them up happens some time later. At NFL speed, the time it takes to get to step two is often longer than you have. I remember trying to tackle Keith Byars in college. I was happy as hell if I could even get a shoulder pad on him. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: naum on January 06, 2014, 08:02:44 PM I'm not sure you really appreciate the speed at which things happen on the field. Hitting someone with your body is the initiation of contact. Wrapping them up happens some time later. At NFL speed, the time it takes to get to step two is often longer than you have. I remember trying to tackle Keith Byars in college. I was happy as hell if I could even get a shoulder pad on him. ^^THIS While I never played at that level I did play against guys that did have pro experience in street games. And this is the biggest point they shared with me in later years about their pro XP -- so much faster, everyone is fast (that, and they hit a lot harder :)). And while it a different sport, I did skate against ex-pros (no NHLer of note but a few enjoyed a cup of coffee and a few shifts at the NHL level) and Canadian junior league players and again, the speed is at a whole different level. It's like stepping into a batting cage and hitting 90+ MPH pitches or stepping on the tennis court and trying to return 100+ MPH serves. Television cameras give a false sense -- if you're at ice level or court level you might get a better appreciation. I remember when the Coyotes first moved to Phoenix and they had their summer camp open -- it was just down the street from where I worked at the then called America West Arena I took a coworker down to ice level (there was a restaurant connected open for lunch) and watched the squad just execute some simple skating drills (like they used to make us do to whip into shape) with pylons from ice level and it gobsmacked my coworker friend, as he had a notion that hockey players were all just a bunch of uncoordinated and grossly physically thuggish deformed goons. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Merusk on January 06, 2014, 08:20:53 PM Quote Congratulations to the Cleveland Browns for continuing to be the most recent Ohio NFL team to win a playoff game. #FactoryOfSadness @ramzy (https://twitter.com/ramzy/status/419938538931896320) Oh lord I'm e-mailing this around work tomorrow. hahaha. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on January 08, 2014, 01:53:33 PM http://nfl.si.com/2014/01/08/josh-mcdaniels-withdraws-cleveland-browns-coaching-job/
Quote ESPN’s Adam Schefter reported that McDaniels has “withdrawn from consideration” for the Browns’ gig, which came available after Rob Chudzinski was fired last week. (http://i.imgur.com/RNACopj.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 08, 2014, 02:26:54 PM My bet is he's hoping to take over for Belichick since the big guy is now in his 60s. I don't think he realizes that Bill will never retire until the team is in shambles or he's in a pine box.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Malakili on January 08, 2014, 02:33:09 PM My bet is he's hoping to take over for Belichick since the big guy is now in his 60s. I don't think he realizes that Bill will never retire until the team is in shambles or he's in a pine box. Maybe he just has enough sense not to take a coaching job for the Browns. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 08, 2014, 02:40:37 PM This is probably his last shot at a HC gig, and being Pats OC seems like a pretty nice position, especially while Brady sticks around. I could imagine him being content to ride that out until another good team has a one-year implosion, like this year's texans, or the 2011 Colts, and try and get back in there.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 08, 2014, 04:13:43 PM Maybe he just has enough sense not to take a coaching job for the Browns. You mean like Bill? :D Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 09, 2014, 09:43:19 AM until another good team has a one-year implosion, like this year's texans I'm not sure the Texans implosion is a one-year thing. I mean, they fell FAR. They ended up worse than the fucking JAGUARS. They've got talent once it gets healthy but if Andre Johnson gets hurt (or Foster again) and they don't settle that QB situation, or fix whatever happened to that defense, that team is not going to improve. At least they'll get a first round QB. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 09, 2014, 10:27:36 AM Houston has never really had the QB they need, save two seasons. They've had the running back and the line and the defense which covered up the QB, but not the QB. He's been top 10 rating at times, but not usually in production.
Schaub is a guy who had one amazing season in 2009, a good one in 2010, and he's never lived up that potential again either by injury or bad play. He simply doesn't put up the yardage numbers you'd expect in a passing league with very little if any real competition in his division other than the Colts. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 09, 2014, 11:02:50 AM until another good team has a one-year implosion, like this year's texans I'm not sure the Texans implosion is a one-year thing. I mean, they fell FAR. They ended up worse than the fucking JAGUARS. They've got talent once it gets healthy but if Andre Johnson gets hurt (or Foster again) and they don't settle that QB situation, or fix whatever happened to that defense, that team is not going to improve. At least they'll get a first round QB. Well I guess we won't know until next season, but on paper the Texans seem to have most of what they need to be a playoff team. Their defense is respectable and should only get better, they have a good WR 1-2 in Johnson and Hopkins, and they'll have Arian Foster back next year and he's hitting the prime age for RBs and has all the talent to be a top-5 back. Their big hole has been at QB, and poor QB play has dragged the rest of the team down this season. It's hard to be a top defense in points when your offense is putting you on the field for 3/4 of the game. I realise not everything is equal, but the colts when from 10-6, to 2-14, back to 11-5 in the transition from Manning to Luck. I think the Texans have the potential to do the same. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 09, 2014, 12:15:41 PM I only think they'll do that if they win the lottery in QB picks. Is there any such "can't miss pick" like Luck in this year's draft?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on January 09, 2014, 12:18:10 PM Not unless Jadeveon Clowney starts taking snaps. Although most people seem to be pretty high on Bridgewater.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 09, 2014, 12:27:08 PM How long before the first "Bridge over troubled Water" headline when he gets signed?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on January 09, 2014, 12:32:56 PM Bridgewater looked impressive in their bowl win. Guy seemed to throw a nice ball from a lot of angles. Great mobility as well. Sounded dumb as rocks, but not quite Vince Young level of dumb.
There's a lot of noise now that Manziel will go #1. I don't think that's a good idea. He seems just as likely to go bust as do well. NFL quality DBs aren't going to get beat on those ducks his chucks up into the air. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 09, 2014, 01:10:56 PM Now is pretty much the time to believe in absolutely nothing that gets said about draft status. It's the glorious time of misinformation put out by everyone in the NFL circles to confuse their true motives.
Clowney is still going to go very high, no matter what nonsense you hear. Manziel is still undersized and probably won't go high in the first round if at all. Bridgewater still has teams salivating over his tools and his upside. Bortles is still probably the best overall QB in terms of mechanics and size. AJ McCarron won't get drafted until the second round at best, probably 3rd. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on January 09, 2014, 01:19:36 PM Now is pretty much the time to believe in absolutely nothing that gets said about draft status. It's the glorious time of misinformation put out by everyone in the NFL circles to confuse their true motives. Clowney is still going to go very high, no matter what nonsense you hear. Manziel is still undersized and probably won't go high in the first round if at all. Bridgewater still has teams salivating over his tools and his upside. Bortles is still probably the best overall QB in terms of mechanics and size. AJ McCarron won't get drafted until the second round at best, probably 3rd. Manziel won't get past the 4th pick. My Browns will make sure he is the next <enter Browns QB name here>. That said, I am hoping the Jags pick him and force Cleveland to screw things up in another way. As for Bridgewater, everything I have read on him so far is that he ran the on-field offense and made the decisions about adjustments at the line. His coaches trusted his smarts to be able to read and change called plays without having to check with the sidelines. That is far above most if not all college QB have to do. I think he'll be another great instant-start QB from college. Clowney will probably be a bust... at least that is the feeling I get. He'll be great while on the field, but will be hurt the majority of the time. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 09, 2014, 01:34:14 PM Manziel's listed at 6'1" 210. That's such bullshit it's not even funny.
He's more like 5'11" maybe 190. I just don't see NFL scouts looking at him and thinking he won't get buried by NFL linemen, or get away with his escapability throws he makes into double covers. Obviously the Browns are the monkey wrench in this because they make terrible choices, but if he slips past them? I don't think he's going in the first round. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 09, 2014, 01:41:17 PM Never put it past the Texans to make an equally Brownsian fuck up pick at #1.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on January 09, 2014, 01:49:52 PM Never put it past the Texans to make an equally Brownsian fuck up pick at #1. If they take Clowney I will faint. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on January 09, 2014, 07:21:53 PM Manziel's listed at 6'1" 210. That's such bullshit it's not even funny. He's more like 5'11" maybe 190. I just don't see NFL scouts looking at him and thinking he won't get buried by NFL linemen, or get away with his escapability throws he makes into double covers. Obviously the Browns are the monkey wrench in this because they make terrible choices, but if he slips past them? I don't think he's going in the first round. I agree with this, but everyone sees Russell Wilson and drools. Heard some sports radio guys saying last night that Drew Brees and Russell Wilson have debunked the myth that you need to be tall to be good QB in the NFL. You can now build offenses around a short QB or some such nonsense. I think a lot of NFL teams look at Manziel and how impressive he looks and thinks they can work with him. A team that needs a QB at pick 5-10 or something. Maybe the Vikings? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 10, 2014, 07:00:38 AM My impression of Wilson is that all thoughts about his height aside, the thing that makes him a great quarterback is the fact that he works harder than the next guy. From what I read he seems to have a phenomenal work ethic, even by the standards of NFL starting QBs.
Manziel is exciting to watch, he's crazily agile, but every time I see him pull some play out of his arse I can't help but feel that he's been given a chance by virtue of the fact that the college-level defenses he's facing aren't fast enough or smart enough to contain him. At the NFL this will be a different matter and he's going to get creamed. Any team that's going to rely on his agility to make plays is going to end up with an RGIII situation; a period of fun up until the point where he gets broken like a twig. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 10, 2014, 07:17:47 AM That's my impression as well. He's benefiting from the fact that the SEC for the most part this year was completely dogshit on defense. If he played 5 years ago he would have been murdered already.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ratadm on January 11, 2014, 04:47:30 PM Well that gives new meaning to throwing the game.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 11, 2014, 06:14:52 PM The Saints looked lost in the rain. It was just laughable they got back in it when Lynch could have just fallen over and iced it.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 11, 2014, 08:09:00 PM Everything gets exposed in the playoffs eventually. The Indy run D was a problem all year, and it caught up with them.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on January 11, 2014, 08:10:44 PM The Patriots would like to say : "the forward pass is overrated"
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 11, 2014, 08:12:25 PM The Patriots would like to say : "the forward pass is overrated" That works against the worst run D in the league. It won't work against the team they have next. They'll have to abuse the fact that both SD and Denver are horrible against the pass. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 12, 2014, 12:14:41 AM Part of Denver's problem is being in the lead by a margin, forcing teams to turn to the pass. Or run D being good hasn't helped that. That beig said, our passing defense HAS been shoddy, but had started to solidify later in te season. Lots of injuries this year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 12, 2014, 09:02:00 AM Denver should be SD unless Peyton tosses out presents or Knowshon gets fumbly. Both SD and Denver are even on the turnover margin battle.
It's a QB battle, in good conditions. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 12, 2014, 10:06:33 AM They should win, but divisional opponent and SD plays really well (7-2) in Denver. Mind you, this is arguably* the best equipped team he's ever had to face in Mile High. One haunted by the specter of missing the AFC Championship game by one blown pass coverage.
*The lack of pass rush has been the biggest issue with the Broncos this season. Yes, the secondary is soft (bend a WHOLE LOT and hopefully don't break), but the lack of pass rush has been sad. In general, the defense was a lot better when Von Miller was back for those few games, but not having a beast on the other side really hurts. Both Sly Williams and Shaun Phillips (especially) have been decent, but not stellar. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 12, 2014, 10:13:58 AM I agree, it comes down to Denver getting to Rivers. They make him uneasy, and I don't think SD's running game is strong enough to carry them to the amount of points they need to win (assuming Denver puts up even close to their average).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 12, 2014, 10:18:15 AM Refs are handing out gifts already in the SF/Carolina game.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 12, 2014, 11:07:24 AM I agree, it comes down to Denver getting to Rivers. They make him uneasy, and I don't think SD's running game is strong enough to carry them to the amount of points they need to win (assuming Denver puts up even close to their average). Mathews ran on us all day last time. Mind you, I think it will be FAR less this time, if only because of his injury. Edit: First half impressions: This team is CLICKING. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 12, 2014, 03:15:36 PM Nothing SD was doing worked. Denver just abused them up front. If SD can't run the ball, they are doomed.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on January 12, 2014, 03:31:26 PM They are lucky they are only down by 17 (so far).
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 12, 2014, 03:43:25 PM Denver is just backing up the dump truck now and wearing them down with the run.
They've absolutely dominated both lines to this point. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 12, 2014, 04:11:07 PM Broncos have not punted yet today and only have 17 points. So weird.
Chargers are going to be in a lot of shit for having Gilchrist back in there after the earlier hit where he was looking concusion-like and then getting that BRUTAL helmet-to-helmet hit. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on January 12, 2014, 04:24:15 PM Ack, stop exposing that deep ball.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 12, 2014, 04:28:46 PM That's been the story all year, teams give up on the run and pass pass pass and the Broncos D is soft in the secondary. It's not strictly terrible.. but if you have a great receiver like Allen... Well, this happens.
Still not worried. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 12, 2014, 04:51:05 PM Fucked up my bet. Assholes.
Otherwise it was never close. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ginaz on January 12, 2014, 04:54:28 PM So Manning vs Brady again. I think most people wanted this more than Rivers vs Luck.
I think this is the first time in years the top 4 teams are in a position to go to the Super Bowl. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 12, 2014, 04:56:13 PM :drill:
http://www.milehighreport.com/2014/1/12/5302296/nfl-gifs-chargers-qb-philip-rivers-throws-temper-tantrum :why_so_serious: See you guys later, I'm gonna go drink! NO WAIT, THIS FIRST: (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bd0i-YBIQAAiqfS.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 12, 2014, 05:00:29 PM It was never in doubt. SD was outclassed the second the weather turned decent, and without their best RB at his best.
Obviously I want Seattle to play Denver to have the 1-2 matchup we've powerranked all year. That probably means we'll get SF and NE because the football gods like to give me nobody to root for. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 12, 2014, 05:42:55 PM (http://i.imgur.com/YVAkfZE.jpg)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 12, 2014, 05:52:52 PM Sniper
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on January 12, 2014, 06:05:03 PM The funniest part of that was actually the flop by Newton when hit with his hand flailing around like you see in cartoons.
GIF of flop: (http://cdn2.sbnation.com/assets/3854181/camflop.gif) Link to page with images in case above doesn't show up or gets blocked: http://www.sbnation.com/lookit/2014/1/12/5301484/ahmad-brooks-leaps-for-the-best-offsides-ever Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on January 12, 2014, 06:39:10 PM Yeah, I watched Newton flop at least three times that game. Swear to christ if it starts catching on...
That said, Carolina got jobbed on a few calls, well, non-calls all game. The Boldin headbutt not 10 minutes after they flagged 15 on Carolina for the same exact thing angered me something fierce. I am completely in agreement with Troy Aikman when he commented about all the shit talk Boldin does... Utmost respect for his play, but fucking stop the shit talking already...it is annoying. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 13, 2014, 09:00:01 AM New Orleans... when will you learn to STOP THROWING SCREEN PASSES AGAINST FAST DEFENSES? 3rd and 15 with 2 TD's down? FUCK IT THROW A SCREEN PASS. Even though it hasn't worked ALL FUCKING GAME. Almost Belicheat levels of arrogance in the playcalling there, especially when you consider their offense worked best when they tried passes of 10-15 yards. Seattle won on defense and I don't see San Fran beating them.
Indy also had stupid playcalling decisions. 8 minutes left, 4th and FUCKING 1, down by multiple touchdowns and you don't go for it? Against a team that has been running the ball down your throat ALL GAME? Yep, time to go home. You're just asking to get ground down. The refs in the San Fran/Carolina game were awful, but they were following the league's edict of "let them play even though we don't do that the entire fucking regular season." Fuck you, NFL. Call it the same all year or shut the fuck up about player safety. Also, Cam Newton is not ready to win a Super Bowl yet, nor is Ron Rivera's coaching. 4 straight runs on the goal line the first time, 3 runs and 1 pass the second time = 2 failed red zone attempts. Denver's pass defense is almost as bad as the Packers was. Good thing they got Peyton Manning. Please let him beat the shit out of Tom Brady. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on January 13, 2014, 09:30:38 AM Huh, the number one defense is playing in the NFC Championship. Go figure.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 13, 2014, 10:21:34 AM Huh, the number one defense is playing in the NFC Championship. Go figure. NE is top 5 in the AFC in points against. Denver...eeeeeeeeeh not so much. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sir T on January 13, 2014, 10:44:44 AM Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 13, 2014, 11:58:19 AM Denver's pass defense is almost as bad as the Packers was. Good thing they got Peyton Manning. Please let him beat the shit out of Tom Brady. Pass D in the first half was great! But then Harris went down and Jammer is terrible. If it turns out to be a foot race, Manning wins. Brady does not trust his receiving corps. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 13, 2014, 12:07:44 PM I believe NE's run plan was specifically tailored to the fact that Indy is shittastic against the run. I think Brady is flinging it come Sunday against Peyton. (see - 50 attempts passing against Denver in the regular season)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: MrHat on January 13, 2014, 12:08:49 PM Denver's pass defense is almost as bad as the Packers was. Good thing they got Peyton Manning. Please let him beat the shit out of Tom Brady. Pass D in the first half was great! But then Harris went down and Jammer is terrible. If it turns out to be a foot race, Manning wins. Brady does not trust his receiving corps. Harris out for season :( :( :( Jammer so terrible. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 13, 2014, 12:40:27 PM I believe NE's run plan was specifically tailored to the fact that Indy is shittastic against the run. I think Brady is flinging it come Sunday against Peyton. (see - 50 attempts passing against Denver in the regular season) Since then they've lost Gronk as well as other injuries. This is not the same Pats team that was there in November. In addition, like most of the season, a lot of those passes came in the second half of the game when they were down and had to make up ground. And definitely do not forget the massive mistakes the Broncos ST made to help the Pats along their way. They've turned into a running team, which passes when it needs to. Match the Broncos receivers against the Patriots receivers and tell me who would rather have. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 13, 2014, 12:55:04 PM I wouldn't keep Tom Brady under wraps when he was flinging the ball just three weeks prior to the end of the season. Edelman and Amendola are good to go, which with a screen game and a semi-fuctional TE safety valve in Hoomajoobs or whatever his name is.
I mean Denver's 27th against the pass and 8th against the rush, they would be complete fools not to throw more. And Belichick isn't a fool. He may be limited by injuries, but I don't see any way they rotate that same gameplan from the Colts game into this week. There's no doubt that Denver has better receivers. The Pats "shockingly" have the better pass defense. If anything I'd try to beat the Pats to death with Knowshon, as they are just as bad against the run as the Colts. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 13, 2014, 12:59:44 PM I still stand by my statements of the ranking for the broncos has a lot to do with garbage time stats. As long as we don't stick Jammer on Edelman, we'll be fine.
Broncos have a great running game. On Sunday, 40% of our runs were for first downs, which is around 2x the league average. So, yeah. I'll miss Moreno a lot when he walks in this offseason. Edit: OH BY THE WAY. FUCKING FIRE OMAR BOLDEN, NOW, ELWAY. Holy fuck that was one of the worst mistakes I've seen in a long time. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 13, 2014, 07:17:41 PM There's no doubt that Denver has better receivers. The Pats "shockingly" have the better pass defense. If anything I'd try to beat the Pats to death with Knowshon, as they are just as bad against the run as the Colts. This. The Pats run defense is not good. Without Wilfork and some others, they just don't defend the run. But that rookie linebacker Collins is like a taller safety in coverage - he's just good. If Denver doesn't run Moreno/Ball first, they are fools. Of course, Collins wasn't matched up against Thomas/Moreno/Ball in the short-mid game so he may not show up as well against real first stringers. New England would be crazy not to pass heavily. Edelman and Amendola are good enough to carry a pass game against that terrible secondary. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on January 13, 2014, 08:12:55 PM Not to mention Vereen.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 13, 2014, 09:54:13 PM The Pats do not have a deep guy, say like Thomas, is the main issue. There's no real threat of a deep game, which is the biggest fear for the Broncos at the moment. The short game is fine. We'll give up some yards but don't break, and still have one of the best red-zone defenses.
I'm getting talked into a corner saying that the Pats won't pass or aren't good. That's not my point. This is just Brady's worst collection of receivers, but they are playing an amazing game all the same. There's a lot to be said that Belichick is coaching his best season given the duck-tape team that he has at the moment. That being said, it can't be stated too much what the loss of Chris Harris means. Before he went out with the injury we had managed to hold them the Chargers to less than 70 yards. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on January 14, 2014, 12:13:02 AM I am a bit surprised nobody mentioned it here, but San Diego was let down big time by their coaching staff. I have rarely seen such disorganization and ineptitude on offense, and it was probably not the fault of the players specifically. I wonder where Whisenhunt's head was all week...focused on his playoff game, or his myriad job interviews? Had I been the Titan's owner, I may have withdrawn my job offer after seeing that disaster. It was happening on the other side of the ball as well. There were at least 5 neutral zone infractions? I know Peyton is trickier than average, but it wasn't that hard to figure out what he was doing...it was practically the same cadence every time, he just changed up when the ball was actually snapped. Inexcusable, and several of them where on key plays that gave first downs. I feel bad for Rivers.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Surlyboi on January 14, 2014, 05:27:40 AM Yeah, I watched Newton flop at least three times that game. Swear to christ if it starts catching on... That said, Carolina got jobbed on a few calls, well, non-calls all game. The Boldin headbutt not 10 minutes after they flagged 15 on Carolina for the same exact thing angered me something fierce. I am completely in agreement with Troy Aikman when he commented about all the shit talk Boldin does... Utmost respect for his play, but fucking stop the shit talking already...it is annoying. Meh, Carolina started that shit a lot earlier than Boldin. As bad as he was that game, the Panthers were shit talking and getting extracurricular within the first five minutes of play. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on January 14, 2014, 06:35:12 AM Yeah, I watched Newton flop at least three times that game. Swear to christ if it starts catching on... That said, Carolina got jobbed on a few calls, well, non-calls all game. The Boldin headbutt not 10 minutes after they flagged 15 on Carolina for the same exact thing angered me something fierce. I am completely in agreement with Troy Aikman when he commented about all the shit talk Boldin does... Utmost respect for his play, but fucking stop the shit talking already...it is annoying. Meh, Carolina started that shit a lot earlier than Boldin. As bad as he was that game, the Panthers were shit talking and getting extracurricular within the first five minutes of play. I agree and I am not excusing the Panthers, but Boldin does it every single game to everyone. And since he is a really good receiver, you see him more on the cameras after catches. Can't stand that style of play I guess. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 14, 2014, 06:42:41 AM The Pats do not have a deep guy, say like Thomas, is the main issue. There's no real threat of a deep game, which is the biggest fear for the Broncos at the moment. The short game is fine. We'll give up some yards but don't break, and still have one of the best red-zone defenses. Uh, why do you say that about the red zone? http://www.teamrankings.com/nfl/stat/opponent-red-zone-scoring-pct Teams are scoring TDs 60% of the time and you're 25th in the NFL by that metric. I would say the red zone defense is more of a liability. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 14, 2014, 08:01:17 AM Yeouch. Earlier in the season it was much higher, or at least as I recall at any rate. Now I wish I could dig down to the individual weeks and see rankings of opponenet total trips to redzone, etc.
Well, I like the way we play in the shortgame at least I guess, especially inside the numbers. The reason I state that was because our short game has been more or less fine (baring, apparently, red zone), and it's just giving up big plays. Mind you, nothing I'm saying is meant to sound like we have a great defense. We've been okay with a splash of good, especially given the losses of Von Miller and Champ Bailey for most of the season and now Wolfe and Harris. I've been the one talking down our defense all year, including when I said we had a good chance to lose against Indy. (Thank you for the link.) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 14, 2014, 08:14:45 AM I am a bit surprised nobody mentioned it here, but San Diego was let down big time by their coaching staff. I have rarely seen such disorganization and ineptitude on offense, and it was probably not the fault of the players specifically. I wonder where Whisenhunt's head was all week...focused on his playoff game, or his myriad job interviews? Had I been the Titan's owner, I may have withdrawn my job offer after seeing that disaster. It was happening on the other side of the ball as well. There were at least 5 neutral zone infractions? I know Peyton is trickier than average, but it wasn't that hard to figure out what he was doing...it was practically the same cadence every time, he just changed up when the ball was actually snapped. Inexcusable, and several of them where on key plays that gave first downs. I feel bad for Rivers. Yeah, that whole thing had disaster written all over it. I was thinking it would be close until I saw the thing about Wisenhunt interviewing three times in the last bit of the week. As for OMAHA, http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2014/01/14/omaha-can-mean-a-lot-of-things-and-ultimately-nothing/ I think the most NZIs we had in one game prior to this was 2, maybe 3. FIVE was hilarious. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on January 17, 2014, 02:09:42 PM Harvin officially out. Also water is reportedly wet.
At least I won't have to watch between my fingers every time a defender enters his zip code for fear of him shattering into flinders. Ricardo Lockette NFC Championship MVP? Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on January 17, 2014, 02:28:10 PM And the Lions get as head coach Jim Caldwell. Good, our team desperately needs a calm, level-headed and slightly befuddled coach to keep us from accidentally falling into any playoffs.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 17, 2014, 02:38:00 PM And the Lions get as head coach Jim Caldwell. Good, our team desperately needs a calm, level-headed and slightly befuddled coach to keep us from accidentally falling into any playoffs. (http://cdn.ksk.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/caldwellsad-600x337.jpg) Obligatory Caldwell Cat. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on January 17, 2014, 03:06:48 PM Damn dude, that's harsh (but funny)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on January 17, 2014, 06:54:11 PM In other news, The Browns will forego the head coaching position and will be lead next year by both the offensive and defensive coordinators on their respective sides of the ball. I mean why not right? Not like it could get worse... :why_so_serious:
This is what happens when your team doesn't have a logo. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on January 17, 2014, 06:55:36 PM That's not the only Browns news!
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/10308653/davone-bess-cleveland-browns-arrested Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 17, 2014, 07:18:18 PM Speaking of run ins with the law...
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-football/24410856/lauren-tannehill-wife-of-dolphins-qb-left-ar-15-rifle-in-rental-car Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 18, 2014, 10:57:37 AM Kellen Winslow getting arrested for masturbating in a parking lot is still the best american football-related legal story of the year so far.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 18, 2014, 11:03:29 AM The Boston Market response about the helpful store locator was gold.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on January 18, 2014, 02:49:38 PM ?
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 18, 2014, 03:03:07 PM ? http://twitchy.com/2014/01/17/boston-market-tweets-kellen-winslow-next-time-use-our-convenient-store-locator/ Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 18, 2014, 05:17:35 PM Norv Turner's moving to Minnesota; so now the Browns are short a HC and an OC.
I wonder if they've considered giving Rob Chudzynski his old job back yet... Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on January 18, 2014, 05:37:54 PM Norv Turner's moving to Minnesota; so now the Browns are short a HC and an OC. I wonder if they've considered giving Rob Chudzynski his old job back yet... Seems Gase is out as well... http://tracking.si.com/2014/01/18/adam-gase-likely-to-turn-down-browns/ Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 18, 2014, 06:10:18 PM I think deep down I don't want anybody to actually take the job, and owners have to hire a high school coach.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on January 19, 2014, 06:14:49 AM Norv Turner's moving to Minnesota; so now the Browns are short a HC and an OC. I wonder if they've considered giving Rob Chudzynski his old job back yet... Seems Gase is out as well... http://tracking.si.com/2014/01/18/adam-gase-likely-to-turn-down-browns/ Horton's gone too. (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap2000000314707/article/ray-horton-to-be-ken-whisenhunts-dc-with-titans) Meanwhile Munchak was interviewing for the Steelers' vacant OL coach position. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 19, 2014, 10:51:55 AM Well, at least for Gase, it sounds like he's not open to going ANYWHERE, which is awesome.
Also, I'm ready for the game now. Got the most important thing this morning. (http://i.imgur.com/Jzxhbb6.jpg) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 19, 2014, 02:46:31 PM I am on cruise control to drunkenness.
IN COM PLETE Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Shannow on January 19, 2014, 02:58:48 PM Talib bails out of another AFC championship. wtf.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 19, 2014, 03:05:59 PM WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on January 19, 2014, 03:12:36 PM The Broncos look fucking terrifying. 400 yards, no turnovers, and pressure all day.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 19, 2014, 03:18:16 PM (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/06/Super_Bowl_XLVIII_logo.jpg)
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 19, 2014, 07:05:48 PM Got the matchup I wanted. Jim Harbaugh gets to take his trantrum-tossing $8 pants back to SF. Good riddance.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Mithas on January 19, 2014, 07:11:48 PM Got the matchup I wanted. Jim Harbaugh gets to take his trantrum-tossing $8 pants back to SF. Good riddance. Agree. Good games today. No Harbaugh and no Belichick will make for an enjoyable Super Bowl. Also - that knee/leg injury to Bowman was nasty. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 19, 2014, 07:28:54 PM Went to a Niner's bar after the Broncos game. :( Cleared out fast. Suddenly become a broncos bar.
Can not wait to post 34+ on the Chickens. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 19, 2014, 07:34:50 PM For once the Power Rankings were spot on all year. This is the best matchup wire-to-wire all season.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: slog on January 19, 2014, 08:00:36 PM (http://i.imgur.com/84QHRMw.jpg)
(http://i.imgur.com/IsqWmNw.png) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Furiously on January 19, 2014, 08:52:21 PM Hey. More importantly.. I called the superrbowl before the Seahawks started playing!. That's not too bad for my first post in sports.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 19, 2014, 09:52:30 PM Yeah, whomever did that edit on Wikipedia can go fuck themselves.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on January 20, 2014, 02:43:47 AM Huh. The best defense in the league is in the Superbowl. Go figure.
What a great matchup, Peyton vs. that Seattle D. No doubt the two best teams are in the SB this year. Also, Harbaugh and Richard Sherman are punks. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on January 20, 2014, 03:17:55 AM Edit: I'm retracting what I said here. I really thought it was a colleague of mine who came up with that...
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on January 20, 2014, 08:38:46 AM I know this may get some hate, but I think that was a game that Alex Smith could have won. He has a much more conservative passing style and wouldn't have given the ball away. This is the price of Kaepernick. If you can keep him contained, he's not much of a stategic leader. I'm not sure if this is his inexperience showing or just a gap in his skill set.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on January 20, 2014, 08:49:34 AM I get why you say that, but I don't exactly agree. Alex is probably a better QB overall (IMO), but against that defense he would have been almost no improvement in the passing game, and far less effective on the ground. The reason I think this is because Alex is a dink and dunk passer, checkdown extraordinaire, and that is exactly what does not tend to work against Seattle's D....they are too good at making the tackle on those short routes.
This is actually why the matchup against Denver is really, really interesting. Seattle is great at the tight-man defense, and Denver has absolutely lived off those short routes and getting yards after the catch. Which is playing to Seattle's strengths. I think it will all come down to how much pressure they can get on Manning. History has shown that if you can get pressure on him, and play really tight man-to-man at the same time, you can get him to make mistakes. There's a reason he has this post-season knock on him. Anyway, if he is afforded enough time, he will tear up any NFL defense, including Seattle. If they can get consistent pressure on him, I think Seattle wins. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 20, 2014, 08:57:43 AM I know this may get some hate, but I think that was a game that Alex Smith could have won. He has a much more conservative passing style and wouldn't have given the ball away. This is the price of Kaepernick. If you can keep him contained, he's not much of a stategic leader. I'm not sure if this is his inexperience showing or just a gap in his skill set. I've been saying this since he got in the league, but Kaepernick isn't a real QB. He's an athlete that can make some throws. When forced to actually throw in the playoff games, he had a 74 combined QB rating. When facing a remotely competent defense, he's been very bad. Against Seattle he's had ratings of 20.1, 67.5, and 56.4. Against Indy (a terrible defense) he had a 49.9 rating. He posted a 42 rating against a Carolina team that only managed 10 points. I don't buy him, I don't buy RG3, I don't really buy Cam, and I don't buy Russell. I don't buy the "new school" of QB. I don't buy any QB that can't put up 3,500 yards in the air consistently in one of the most wide open passing leagues in the land. Russell has a chance to prove me wrong, but I'm betting it will be his defense and running game that does it, not him. I think if you put Russell on Denver, they aren't even in the playoffs. Alex Smith posted a 119.7 rating in a playoff game and lost because his defense gave it away. Alex Smith is a QB I would put on any team missing the QB piece and he would improve them, I think, but perhaps not dominate. EDIT: I do buy Andrew Luck. I do buy Matt Ryan if he wasn't on the god-awful Falcons. I do buy Ryan Tannehill and think he has room to improve, but I'm afraid Miami may hinder that. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 20, 2014, 09:11:27 AM I'm not sold on either Wilson or Kap - I think they have been consistently overrated because of the teams they are on. Granted, Kap just absolutely DESTROYED Green Bay last year with his legs, but his passing game still isn't there. When Crabtree was out this year, they only had good passing games against teams with bad defenses like that first game against Green Bay. And that game in particular was because of Boldin constantly getting open. You put Wilson or Kap on Atlanta this year, they would get SLAUGHTERED because of how bad the O line and running game is. Wilson in particular didn't look great yesterday but he made a few big passing plays (in no small part because his wideouts caught passes that could easily have been picked).
Keep in mind both these guys are essentially second year players and most experts on the position say it takes 3 years to really get it at the NFL level. So they have time. But yes, they would not be pro bowlers on shitty teams. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 20, 2014, 11:38:27 AM NFL Thread in Review:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on January 20, 2014, 11:51:29 AM My comment on Schaub may be the only correct thing I've said in the entire thread this year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on January 20, 2014, 01:49:39 PM I know this may get some hate, but I think that was a game that Alex Smith could have won. He has a much more conservative passing style and wouldn't have given the ball away. This is the price of Kaepernick. If you can keep him contained, he's not much of a stategic leader. I'm not sure if this is his inexperience showing or just a gap in his skill set. The fault for that was entirely on the play caller for the 49ers, not Kaepernik (unless it was him who called the play). When you have 1st and what, 15-ish with three time-outs and 45 seconds to go, why the eff would you call for a deep corner route? It was a completely braindead call. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Ingmar on January 20, 2014, 01:50:34 PM Kaep should still have either thrown it away or checked down when he saw the coverage. He's not yet making the right decisions in these situations.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 20, 2014, 01:52:38 PM NFL Thread in Review: <snip> Hah, thanks for taking the time to do that, you made me smile. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Megrim on January 20, 2014, 01:58:19 PM Kaep should still have either thrown it away or checked down when he saw the coverage. He's not yet making the right decisions in these situations. Well yea, but why make the inexperienced QB have to make that choice? The coach needed to be wiser. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 20, 2014, 02:10:11 PM NFL Thread in Review: <snip> Hah, thanks for taking the time to do that, you made me smile. Thanks, I think it's fun to look back on a year and see the wild predictions after the fact. Some are spot on, some are way off, and some are downright hilarious. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Rasix on January 20, 2014, 02:14:31 PM Mine wasn't much of a prognostication. It was a certainty.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 20, 2014, 02:20:55 PM There was actually a really robust debate on Ponder that looks completely silly now.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 20, 2014, 03:11:32 PM We should have a bold prediction/sane prediction theme to kick off the 2014 thread! :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nevermore on January 20, 2014, 06:44:53 PM Well, the Steelers proved me wrong by making it all the way to .500! :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 20, 2014, 07:43:38 PM There was actually a really robust debate on Ponder that looks completely silly now. Who knew he really was as bad as Blaine Gabbert? I figured with Jennings and Patterson, he'd at least be able to complete 55% of his passes. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sjofn on January 20, 2014, 10:04:54 PM Well, the Steelers proved me wrong by making it all the way to .500! :awesome_for_real: Don't YOU feel silly! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on January 21, 2014, 11:53:32 AM Radio call of the Smith INT (http://www.seahawks.com/videos-photos/audio/Audio_Raible_calls_Malcolm_Smith_interception/12514e94-fa90-4752-9fdc-d0a67557f0f4). Worth it for the strangled scream that Warren Moon (the color guy) does mid-call :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 23, 2014, 07:11:14 AM NFL ruled on the Welker hit that Belichick called the worst play he's seen. NFL decided it wasn't even a penalty, and that Belichick should cut out the butthurt.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on January 23, 2014, 10:48:25 AM I watched the replay just one time in regular speed, and I didn't think it looked like anything. Maybe a flaggable pick, but I didn't actually rewind it to see when he made contact. Didn't look dirty to me.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on January 23, 2014, 10:49:34 AM If Welker had actually hit someone hard enough to draw a flag he (Welker) would still be in a coma.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 23, 2014, 11:06:57 AM I'm not a big fan of what he did, but it was exactly the same situation with DRC on the other end of it on Pat's previous possession. If one was going to be a flag/fine, the other one would have had to be too.
I think it comes down to the two teams playing physical. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on January 23, 2014, 08:32:16 PM Saw this on Huffpo and thought you guys might get a kick out of it. It's a graphic of all of the documented injuries that occurred this NFL season by location.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 23, 2014, 09:23:31 PM That is a FUCKLOAD of knee injuries. :ye_gods:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on January 23, 2014, 09:45:26 PM Needs a comparison against last year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Phildo on January 24, 2014, 05:40:15 AM The 11 pectoral injuries gave me a chuckle, though.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on January 24, 2014, 05:42:52 AM Needs a comparison against last year. There's just no pleasing you people! Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 24, 2014, 06:24:04 AM Looks like 70% below the waist to above the waist, but it does need last year's to compare.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Chimpy on January 24, 2014, 07:42:58 AM How many of those injuries were to Harvin? :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Bungee on January 24, 2014, 08:02:22 AM Looks like 70% below the waist to above the waist, but it does need last year's to compare. Sounds like Soccer. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on January 24, 2014, 10:26:18 PM Needs a comparison against last year. There's just no pleasing you people! What I meant was, it would be interesting to see how it lines up compared to previous years - before all the changes in order to protect against head injuries. There is a part of my tiny dinosaur brain that wonders what happens when you begin colliding these guys together more frequently and violently where their centers of gravity are. And also, now that defenders go away from their target's head area, are defenders sustaining more head injuries and serious injuries in general now that they are more violently targeting center of mass with their own heads? I understand why they make the rule changes to protect the players, but I begin to wonder if it is working at all, or even having the opposite effect. I can't remember seeing so many injuries as during this past season. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on January 25, 2014, 10:37:52 AM This one is just for Haemish.
Kids reenact the postgame interview with Sherman. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6kRB1_nGqM) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Tannhauser on January 25, 2014, 12:07:49 PM (http://faeronwheeler.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/Star-Trek-Kirk-Khan.jpg)
CCCCRRRRRAAAAABBBBBBTTTTTRRRRRRREEEEEEEEE! That was cute, thanks. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 25, 2014, 01:08:35 PM :awesome_for_real:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on January 25, 2014, 01:51:44 PM Can't remember if I posted this here or just on FB, but it is pretty amusing-
Seahawks fans try to watch NFC title game in complete silence (http://deadspin.com/a-bunch-of-seahawks-fans-tried-to-watch-last-weeks-gam-1508339669) There is no chance I could have even come close. Unless I fell over dead, which was a distinct possibility. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 25, 2014, 09:13:39 PM That was pretty awesome. I'd have lost the challenge too.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Sir T on January 26, 2014, 07:41:09 PM Bad lip reading the NFL; 2014 edition
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRqKYXcL-2U (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rRqKYXcL-2U) Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 27, 2014, 08:17:26 AM The fact those guys got a McD's commercial still makes me :why_so_serious:
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 27, 2014, 08:35:04 AM The fact those guys got a McD's commercial still makes me :why_so_serious: I'm just glad McDs went TO them to do it instead of knocking it off terribly. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Cyrrex on January 27, 2014, 08:39:54 AM Really well done, the voices themselves are hilarious.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: sickrubik on January 27, 2014, 11:02:15 AM Gary Kubiak to the Ravens as OC. Good hire.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Nebu on January 27, 2014, 11:22:51 AM Gary Kubiak to the Ravens as OC. Good hire. I thought that they might have hired him to replace Flacco. :why_so_serious: Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: WayAbvPar on January 27, 2014, 01:47:58 PM They did. As whipping boy, not QB though.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 27, 2014, 01:58:33 PM Did the Ravens fire their GM? Because that's the biggest fuckup in the entire organization.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: croaker69 on January 28, 2014, 08:36:22 AM Did the Ravens fire their GM? Because that's the biggest fuckup in the entire organization. Strange since Ozzie Newsome has been feted as one of the best all around GMs in the NFL for the past 5-10 years. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 28, 2014, 08:47:12 AM He has done a great job in the past building that team to a place where they could win a Super Bowl by, let's face it, pure unadulterated luck in Denver.
The problem is he let the Flacco deal linger until it was impossible not to overpay him, and Flacco is a mediocre QB. The salary cap situation in Baltimore is now a complete disaster, and it's all the GM's fault. Baltimore isn't going to get back to the playoffs. They are going to have 4 players in 2014 with a $53M cap hit. That's about $10M higher than the top 4 in Seattle and the top 4 in Denver including Peyton's $17.5M hit. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 28, 2014, 08:52:32 AM They are going to have 4 players in 2014 with a $53M cap hit. Out of curiousity, which ones besides Flacco? I'm guessing one of those is Ray Rice but who the hell else do they have that they've paid so handsomely? Suggs? That number makes the Boldin trade more understandable yet still is a disaster in the making. They should never have let Flacco go so long that they HAD to pay him way over his value. Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Paelos on January 28, 2014, 08:55:03 AM Haloti Ngata 16,000,000
Joe Flacco 14,800,000 Terrell Suggs 12,400,000 Lardarius Webb 10,500,000 Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 28, 2014, 09:25:12 AM $16 million for NGATA? I mean he's good and all, but that's a shitload of cap space for a nose tackle who actually regressed a bit last year.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: K9 on January 28, 2014, 01:36:51 PM Well there's always the Lions, where Suh, Stafford and Megatron will have a combined cap hit of $51.3M next year...
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: HaemishM on January 28, 2014, 03:43:50 PM At least those three are more productive.
Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: 01101010 on February 07, 2014, 08:30:47 AM http://www.nfl.com/photos/0ap2000000323761
Kinda neat. Quote Football helmets in the 'Star Wars' universe Title: Re: NFL 2013 Post by: Trippy on February 10, 2014, 03:01:00 PM Split off NFL 2014 thread here:
http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=23984.0 |