f13.net

f13.net General Forums => Sports / Fantasy Sports => Topic started by: ghost on May 17, 2011, 01:47:10 PM



Title: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on May 17, 2011, 01:47:10 PM
Okay, let's start this thing out with a bang!

ESPN has a new power ranking for NFL helmets out (http://espn.go.com/blog/afcwest/post/_/id/27488/power-rankings-top-10-nfl-helmets). 


I personally like the Lions at #1, the Jets at #2 and the Eagles at #3.  I'm not a huge fan of the Browns or the Dolphins.  Then there's the obvious train wrecks of Cincinnati, Panthers and Jaguars.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on May 17, 2011, 01:49:58 PM
Zero votes for the Niners? Seriously?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on May 17, 2011, 02:11:32 PM
This one may be better. 

Retro uni helmets (http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=lukas/110517_throwback_nfl_helmets&sportCat=nfl).  Old Tampa Bay was fucking spectacular.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on May 17, 2011, 02:39:18 PM
Old TB is my favorite helmet of all time.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on May 17, 2011, 02:43:53 PM
Old Pats were pretty good too.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on May 17, 2011, 02:46:47 PM
I liked the Oilers helmets myself.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on May 17, 2011, 03:25:34 PM
wtf are the Raiders doing on that first power ranking. Their helmets are boring.

I miss the old Buccaneer helmets. <sniff>


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on May 17, 2011, 03:54:38 PM
I liked the Oilers helmets myself.

Ooh.  I forgot about those.  They were damned nice too.
(http://www.sportsblink.com/product_images/earl-campbell-houston-oilers-autographed-throwback-mini-helmet-hof-inscription-3376824.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on May 17, 2011, 04:27:34 PM
Aren't all the helmets just basic logos?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on May 17, 2011, 04:32:09 PM
There's nothing basic about:

(http://www.avatarist.com/avatars/Sports/American-Football/Tampa-Bay-Buccaneers/Tampa-Bay-Buccaneers-3.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on May 17, 2011, 04:58:07 PM
There's nothing basic about:

(http://www.avatarist.com/avatars/Sports/American-Football/Tampa-Bay-Buccaneers/Tampa-Bay-Buccaneers-3.gif)

(http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slideshows/416/slideshow_41628/display_image.jpg)

At my Browns are at the top of the list in SOMETHING.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on May 17, 2011, 04:59:50 PM
10 PRINT "I AM FABULOUS"
20 GOTO 10


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on May 17, 2011, 06:20:03 PM
Your picture is broken for me, Ingmar. :(


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on May 17, 2011, 07:08:20 PM
Yep, update the photo please.  I was excited to see it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on May 17, 2011, 07:31:51 PM
Helmet power rankings?

And you really called the thread NFL 2011 for that?

(also, shouldn't we just call it NFL 2012 and call it a day?)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on May 17, 2011, 07:35:39 PM
Quit being a party pooper.  It's time to start talking football!   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on May 17, 2011, 08:53:13 PM
We'd need a lawyer in here to start talking football. Go wake up Ab.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on May 17, 2011, 09:01:55 PM
A CPA is as good as a lawyer, I mean attorney.   :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on May 18, 2011, 02:00:01 AM
Ohh, Ingmar had posted this:

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/9/98/Tampa_Bay_Buccaneers_logo_old.svg/200px-Tampa_Bay_Buccaneers_logo_old.svg.png)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on May 18, 2011, 06:47:37 AM
Since we have to address it, here's a recap of what we know about the lockout.

We're seven weeks into the lockout. The first legal battle went to the players when Judge Susan Nelson ruled to end the lockout. The owners then filed an appeal, and the courts granted them a stay of the lockout until they can fully rule on the issue. The full appeal is on June 3rd. Both parties are not negotiating at this time. The owners feel confident they can win in court. The players feel confident THEY can win in court. The stupid thing is that they are arguing in court instead of negotiating an actual deal.

Now for my view as a financial guy. If you believe for a second that the owners are struggling to make ends meet due to player salaries, you are criminally stupid. The NFL absolutely could not be in higher demand than it is right now. It has become so popular that NFL Super Bowl consistently draws over 100 million viewers. Regular season games draw 25 million viewers consistently. The average ticket price to an NFL game is $90. 26 out of 32 markets operated at 90%+ capacity last year. Assuming 99% and above as a sellout, 33% of the markets completely sold out their stadiums all season long.

The average NFL franchise made $50M on ticket revenues alone last year by my estimates. They are making $94M per team due to the TV deals per year. Based on numbers from the Cardinals in 2009, I'm estimating that they make $10M in revenue per year on concessions. Top franchises can make $300M in merchandizing, but I'll only assume a quarter of that for the regular franchise, $75M. Without even taking into account advertising, that's $229M in revenue a year. Average payroll is $106M. Gross profit is $123M. Even assuming a 70% costs margin on that gross, you're looking at $37M in profits a year.

$37,000,000 going directly to the owners a year. Even in the crappy markets. Yeah, I'm not crying for them.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on May 18, 2011, 06:50:00 AM
Yeah, I'm not buying owner distress on this one.  In the NBA?  Maybe so.  And in the NBA the deal is grossly weighted to the players.  I'm firmly in the camp of the players in this fight.  I'm not sure that the players are going about it right though. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on May 27, 2011, 05:36:16 AM
How (and Why) Athletes Go Broke (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1153364/index.htm)

A really good piece from Sports Illustrated, and the numbers are really depressing. 78% of NFL players are bankrupt or in financial difficulty within two years of retiring, for a range of reasons.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on May 27, 2011, 06:18:35 AM
That piece is a very strong argument for having a "football" major for high level players at major D1 schools.  Of course most of those guys don't go do class anyway, so it doesn't matter.....  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on May 27, 2011, 07:55:12 AM
It's only depressing because it really reminds you how big of a leech colleges are on these kids. They don't teach them anything. There's no reason for an football player to be attending science or history or liberal arts classes, but they damn well should be attending communications, financial, and journalism classes.

Also, this is a racial/cultural problem as well. Note the list of atheletes in that room with rocket Ismail. It's seven black guys and one white guy. The pressures of the black community to trust your friends and family, bring people up from the hood with you, and the obsession to be flashy with tangible shit get them in massive trouble.

The white guys in that article are MLB players who invested with a powerbroker that committed massive fraud. That's a little different than pissing it all away on your dumbass friends and cars. Also, note that in the article that they give the percentages of players going broke as 78% and 60% in the black dominated NFL and NBA, but they don't bother to give the percentages in the white-dominated MLB. The reason is because it's much much lower.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on June 06, 2011, 11:38:22 AM
It looks like Plaxico Burress is out of jail (http://sports.espn.go.com/new-york/nfl/news/story?id=6630528).   I wonder who he'll end up with?  He's a helluva talent.  My bet is Cowboys or Bengals. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on June 06, 2011, 11:45:40 AM
Cowboys don't really need him, and the Bengals are trying to get younger at wideout. A lot of the usual suspects are places where they either don't need him or he's totally not what they are looking for. My bet? Chicago, Baltimore or Philly.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on June 06, 2011, 11:46:23 AM
Don't count out the Raiders.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on June 06, 2011, 11:47:54 AM
Normally, they'd have been first on the list for any ex-con football player, but I don't think they are quite that stupid right now.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on June 06, 2011, 11:48:23 AM
Cowboys don't really need him, and the Bengals are trying to get younger at wideout. A lot of the usual suspects are places where they either don't need him or he's totally not what they are looking for. My bet? Chicago, Baltimore or Philly.

That was a snarky comment for the two aforementioned clubs' tendencies to bring in "damaged goods".  I really could see Jerry Jones ponying up for him though.  I suspect that the Eagles might even fit for that as well.

As for reality?  I have no fucking clue except probably not the Giants.  


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on June 06, 2011, 12:02:51 PM
My bet is that the Panthers make a play at him. Outside of Steve Smith, their receiving core is a joke. Now with the new QB talent, I'd think they have more to offer an aging vet looking to make his way back into the league.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on June 06, 2011, 12:18:52 PM
I think the Panthers are focused on a youth move. They know they won't win shit this year whether their starting QB is Moore, Claussen or Cam Newton. Burress won't help Steve Smith enough and he'll take reps from a young guy that could grow with whichever franchise QB they go with.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on June 06, 2011, 12:20:47 PM
My thought is that it will be a semi-contender to go after Burress.  He's got enough baggage that a shitty team that is rebuilding may not want to risk the money on him.  But a team like the Pats, Cowboys, Eagles, or even the Colts could drop the cash and take a risk because they're already good.  Pats may be a decent bet, now that I think about it.  They dealt with Moss pretty well for a while.  Belichick seems to do okay with egos and baggage.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on June 06, 2011, 12:22:04 PM
I could see the Pats, but not the Colts. Manning got them to the playoffs throwing to hobos off the street last year. Why pay for old, damaged goods?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on June 06, 2011, 12:31:12 PM
I could see the Pats, but not the Colts. Manning got them to the playoffs throwing to hobos off the street last year. Why pay for old, damaged goods?

Because they are old and seem to be on the downhilll slide?  They've only got so many years of Manning left to work with. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on June 06, 2011, 12:37:56 PM
I know my Colt would not mind a big receiver to throw to...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on June 06, 2011, 01:07:37 PM
I think the Panthers are focused on a youth move. They know they won't win shit this year whether their starting QB is Moore, Claussen or Cam Newton. Burress won't help Steve Smith enough and he'll take reps from a young guy that could grow with whichever franchise QB they go with.

I disagree with the Smith help. Smith's going to draw doubles all year unless they bring in a name who can actually make a secondary think twice. Burress is a big enough name where leaving him 1 on 1 could be a total disaster.

By the way, you don't want receivers growing with QBs. That's a receipt for disaster. What you want is experienced WRs with younger QBs, and then when the QB matures, you give him younger WRs. Experienced WRs open up things for QBs who can only make so many reads, while younger receivers offer the speed and raw athleticism that a mature QB who can squeeze the ball into spots will abuse.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on June 06, 2011, 01:58:01 PM
The Panthers already have Smith to help the young QB. Having another ego-driven older wideout taking up more money than he's worth isn't going to help. They'd be better off with running backs and o-linemen than another idiot receiver.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on June 06, 2011, 03:09:43 PM
The Panthers already have Smith to help the young QB. Having another ego-driven older wideout taking up more money than he's worth isn't going to help. They'd be better off with running backs and o-linemen than another idiot receiver.

The entire NFL would be better off with running backs or offensive lineman than another idiot receiver though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on June 06, 2011, 03:18:55 PM
That's true. I honestly don't know why people think that having a big name wideout matters. In almost every situation, I can point to the lineman and the QB being the reason for a team's success.

I'm trying to think of a game-changer wide receiver, and it's pretty damn hard. I mean, is there are guy you go, yeah without that wide receiver, there's no way in hell they make the playoffs? Conversely can you point to a situation where they had the line, they had the experienced QB, but they lacked a receiver that could make a difference?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on June 06, 2011, 03:28:38 PM
Jerry Rice?  He's the last game changer that I remember over a long scale of time.  And he had some damned good QBs to help him out. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on June 06, 2011, 04:02:58 PM
While I do not think Jerry Rice would've been Jerry Motherfuckin' Rice without the QBs he played for, I don't think they would've been OMG Those Quarterbacks!!!! without him, yeah.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Azuredream on June 06, 2011, 05:41:01 PM
I think Andre Johnson makes Matt Schaub look better than he actually is, but Houston hasn't made the playoffs so he can't be that much of a game-changer.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on June 06, 2011, 06:39:40 PM
While I do not think Jerry Rice would've been Jerry Motherfuckin' Rice without the QBs he played for, I don't think they would've been OMG Those Quarterbacks!!!! without him, yeah.

Jerry Rice was certainly a badass (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rsrhyFsfOFM).  There's no disputing that.  He probably made Steve Young more OMG than Montana, who was on a different planet when it comes to talent. 

I don't remember any receivers that were "game changers" like Rice since then.  Does anyone have a name? 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on June 06, 2011, 06:46:13 PM
Tim Brown wasn't any slouch, but my hero back in the day was Steve Largent. Cris Carter was pretty good and Michael Irving. Dunno if anyone was on Jerry's level though, so kind of an unfair comparison.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on June 06, 2011, 07:20:47 PM
Sterling Sharpe was a beast. Sadly his neck injury ended his career early.

Of course, the loss of Sharpe is pretty much what turned Green Bay into the home of the "obscure wideout becomes league leader" capital of the NFL, and it arguably made Favre even better than he already was.

Most people just think of him as a funny analyst on ESPN/wherever he went to these days.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on June 06, 2011, 07:27:09 PM
Sterling Sharpe was a beast. Sadly his neck injury ended his career early.

Of course, the loss of Sharpe is pretty much what turned Green Bay into the home of the "obscure wideout becomes league leader" capital of the NFL, and it arguably made Favre even better than he already was.

Most people just think of him as a funny analyst on ESPN/wherever he went to these days.

aka Wesley Snipes?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on June 06, 2011, 08:49:16 PM
I think Terrell Owens and Randy Moss were both game-changers at times in their careers. Philly definitely wouldn't have made the Super Bowl without Owens that year, and Randy Moss made Dante Culpepper a much better NFL QB than he was, not to mention how dominant he made Tom Brady in 2007. They aren't Rice level, mainly because Rice was able to keep his level of play consistently high for a lot longer than to two of them combined. Marvin Harrison was certainly one of the reasons the Colts were good when they didn't have any good secondary receivers (i.e. until Reggie Wayne came along).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on June 07, 2011, 06:54:21 AM
It's interesting to check out the stats of TO, Jerry Rice and Moss.  Over an 11 year stretch in each of their careers they were very similar.  

Moss (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/M/MossRa00.htm)
TO (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/O/OwenTe00.htm)
Jerry Rice (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/R/RiceJe00.htm)

I think that Rice probably had two things going for him:  1.  He wasn't caught up with the "gotta get mine" mentality that Meshawn Johnson brought with him to the league, and 2.  He had a great fucking team.  I would love to see what a guy like Moss could have done with a reasonable mental state and a great team when he was in  his prime.

Reviewing his stats, it is clear that Plaxico Burress is not that special receiver (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/B/BurrPl00.htm). 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on June 07, 2011, 07:43:20 AM
There's absolutely nothing that a loud-mouthed-me-first receiver can bring to my team that I couldn't get from a guy like Marvin Harrison, Brian Finneran, or Wes Welker.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on June 07, 2011, 07:58:09 AM
Man, Wes Welker is absolutely worth his weight in fucking gold, IMO. He's like a more talented version of Donald Driver. Quiet, tough as nails possession receiver who always seems to get open when you need him. How the fuck Miami traded him to a division rival I will never figure out.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on June 07, 2011, 08:03:50 AM
Welker is amazing.  And there's a reason the Dolphins are so fucking terrible-  their front office sucks.  Of course they traded them to a division rival.  That's the only logical course for such a fucked up organization.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: KallDrexx on June 07, 2011, 09:51:49 AM
FML...

So the NFL is considering an 8-game season (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/NFL-prepares-for-8-game-season-contingency-plan?urn=nfl-wp2407), which would push the super bowl back one week to February 12th, which is my wedding day........


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on June 07, 2011, 09:55:10 AM
Quote
It's not an absolute lead-pipe lock that we'll have a full NFL season, and as such, the owners and commissioner have been planning for alternate shortened seasons, the likes of which we haven't had since 1987, which was the last time there was a work stoppage.
:awesome_for_real:

I think it's a lead-pipe-lock that we won't have a full NFL season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: stu on June 07, 2011, 12:08:51 PM
Welker is amazing.  And there's a reason the Dolphins are so fucking terrible-  their front office sucks.  Of course they traded them to a division rival.  That's the only logical course for such a fucked up organization.

Ireland/Sparano wouldn't have made that trade, but I see your point. The new regime had to draft Davone Bess to cover the loss of Welker when they took office in 2008.  :awesome_for_real: Luckily, Bess can hold his own.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on June 07, 2011, 12:42:46 PM
In the worst trades in the that franchise, I'd rank them like this:

1 - Dolphins trade for Culpepper instead of signing Drew Brees.
2 - Dolphins trade away 2 #1's and a #2 for Ricky Williams
3 - Dolphins trade Anthony Carter to the Vikings for a LB and a pick
4 - Dolphins trade Wes Welker for 2 picks.
5 - Dolphins trade second round pick to Philly for AJ Feely

In that order. If I was a fan I'd just focus on the fact my basketball team is good.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: stu on June 07, 2011, 12:52:39 PM
Those are still old deals. Oh lordy, the Brees deal was a real missed opportunity but I'm happy for the Saints. The Randy Mueller years were harsh for Miami. Still, they haven't made any bad moves since the new guys arrived, at least off the top of my head. Not having a replacement at QB has hurt them. I guess they could have taken Matt Ryan instead of Long, but then they wouldn't have a line (plus Long was a sure thing)...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on June 07, 2011, 12:59:05 PM
Trading 2 picks for Brandon Marshall is newer, and equally as dumb for the Dolphins.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: stu on June 07, 2011, 01:07:49 PM
That's crazy talk. :uhrr: Brandon Marshall is one of the top receivers in the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on June 07, 2011, 01:08:41 PM
But WR is about the 6th most important position on a team (if that), and there are very few players worth that kind of bounty.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on June 07, 2011, 01:31:44 PM
That's crazy talk. :uhrr: Brandon Marshall is one of the top receivers in the NFL when his QB can actually throw him the ball.

FIFY

Fucking Kyle Neckbeard Orton could hit Marshall for long bombs better than anyone on the Miami team last year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on June 07, 2011, 01:59:49 PM
That's crazy talk. :uhrr: Brandon Marshall is one of the top receivers in the NFL.

Bradon Marshall had two good games. The loss to the Jets where he had 166 yards and a TD. The other was the OT win in Green Bay when he had 127 yards on 10 catches. Both of those were early in the season. After that, teams planned for him and completely took him out of the equation (excepting Buffalo and Detroit, who can't cover a wounded sloth).

Take away the two meaningless games against those crap teams at the end of the year, and you have a receiver that gets 65-70 yards a game, and catches a TD once in every 6. Hell even with the crap games, I can name 20 receivers I'd rather have in the league.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: stu on June 07, 2011, 02:38:21 PM
You know as well as I do, that's not an accurate depiction of him. He had to rely on Tyler Thigpen to get him the ball in the second half. Tyler Thigpen.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on June 07, 2011, 02:39:08 PM
Who is Brandon Marshall?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on June 07, 2011, 02:50:18 PM
Some dude that tends to beat on his girlfriends.   


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on June 07, 2011, 02:53:19 PM
Not that that narrows the field down any.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on June 07, 2011, 03:11:01 PM
You know as well as I do, that's not an accurate depiction of him. He had to rely on Tyler Thigpen to get him the ball in the second half. Tyler Thigpen.

I'm not pointing out that he sucks. I'm pointing out how stupid it was to trade for a receiver. You can gameplan for one guy, and you need him to get the ball.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on June 07, 2011, 08:28:22 PM
Not that that narrows the field down any.  :why_so_serious:

You stole my post.  :x


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on July 12, 2011, 05:51:28 PM
The IT Director at work is the brother-in-law of Dallas' head scout.  Just thought I'd pass along Jimmy Jone's personal guarantee that the season will go on. (This info was relayed as the ITD was looking to set up fantasy leagues for this year.)

Take it at the face value of JJ's integrity.

 :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on July 25, 2011, 02:21:24 PM
I'm surprised no one has mentioned that the lockout is over and the season is on after all.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on July 25, 2011, 02:37:13 PM
Favre rumored to Philly as backup.  Vick tweets "it would be an honor to have Favre as my backup" and then deletes it an hour later.

The NFL is back, baby!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Azuredream on July 25, 2011, 11:40:54 PM
I'm surprised no one has mentioned that the lockout is over and the season is on after all.

I think most people figured it would be back at some point before the season. I followed the whole story but I bet most people just said "come get me when the lockout is over." I'm looking forward to all the free agent activity being condensed.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 26, 2011, 06:51:46 AM
Now that it's all over I'm reminded that both sides are assholes for doing this publically.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 26, 2011, 09:14:13 AM
Very torn. Want the Seahawks to do well, but if they are bad, they need to be REALLY bad so Andrew Luck comes to town a year from now.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on July 26, 2011, 09:30:13 AM
Very torn. Want the Seahawks to do well, but if they are bad, they need to be REALLY bad so Andrew Luck comes to town a year from now.

They'll probably win 5-6 games and miss out on any good players.   :awesome_for_real:

I'm still not particularly sold on Pete Carroll as an NFL coach.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on July 26, 2011, 09:31:28 AM
Very torn. Want the Seahawks to do well, but if they are bad, they need to be REALLY bad so Andrew Luck comes to town a year from now.

Maybe they'll catch whatever is afflicting the Mariners.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: El Gallo on July 26, 2011, 11:47:05 AM
Very torn. Want the Seahawks to do well, but if they are bad, they need to be REALLY bad so Andrew Luck comes to town a year from now.

They'll probably win 5-6 games and miss out on any good players make the playoffs.   

Jokes never get old for me.  It's a gift.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 26, 2011, 01:52:05 PM
Welp.

Everyone reporting that Hasselbeck is definitely out, and that Tarvaris Jackson is flying to Seattle tonight. Looks like it is plan B and Andrew Luck. I just hope he shaves that godawful beard before draft day.

I seriously don't give a fuck who they sign now- if our QB is either Jackson or Clipboard Jesus we are well and truly fucked. This is going to be a long, shitty season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 26, 2011, 01:53:40 PM
The Cowboys finally cut Roy Williams. Speaking for Cowboys fans everywhere, THANK GOD!

That may be the worst bust we've had in years.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on July 26, 2011, 02:17:34 PM
The Cowboys finally cut Roy Williams. Speaking for Cowboys fans everywhere, THANK GOD!

That may be the worst bust we've had in years.

Which the Browns will pick him up and then come the end of a 3-13 season, blame it all on McCoy.  :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on July 26, 2011, 03:02:09 PM
Why the fuck would the Seahwaks want Tavaris Jackson? I'd rather have a paraplegic Hasselbeck than Tavaris Jackson. Shit, he couldn't win a starting job with one of the best running games in the league and got beat out two years in a row by a man twice his age (granted that man was Favre, but still). I guess they didn't want to trade for Kolb? Or, I don't know, search Skid Row for some crack addict? If the Cardinals really do get Kolb in a trade, I look forward to them and the Rams fighting over the NFC's yearly 7-9 playoff berth.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on July 26, 2011, 03:12:17 PM
Welp.

Everyone reporting that Hasselbeck is definitely out, and that Tarvaris Jackson is flying to Seattle tonight. Looks like it is plan B and Andrew Luck. I just hope he shaves that godawful beard before draft day.

I seriously don't give a fuck who they sign now- if our QB is either Jackson or Clipboard Jesus we are well and truly fucked. This is going to be a long, shitty season.

You do play in the NFC West.  The best team on paper might be the Rams.  THE RAMS. 



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on July 26, 2011, 03:15:09 PM
I'm surprised no one has mentioned that the lockout is over and the season is on after all.

Thats the power of strikes/lockouts, I stop paying attention.  I did know before reading this that it was back on, but the funny thing is I'm actually less excited by the news than I normally would be for football at this point.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on July 26, 2011, 03:29:56 PM
Plus it is baseball season!  :awesome_for_real:

Hearing rumors that Hasselbeck might end up down here. Maybe his wife won't let him come play in liberal land though.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on July 26, 2011, 03:32:05 PM
That's Tim's wife.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on July 26, 2011, 03:35:26 PM
I'm not sure he's any improvement on Smallhands anyway, really all we have to hope for is that Kaepernick pans out. Having watched him destroy Cal basically by himself I am somewhat optimistic.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: stu on July 26, 2011, 08:09:28 PM

Andrew Luck. I just hope he shaves that godawful beard before draft day.
 

(http://i.imgur.com/jtETT.png)

Klopeeeeeeeek!!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on July 27, 2011, 03:36:55 AM
Donovan McNabb rumored to be coming to Nashville?  :ye_gods:



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on July 27, 2011, 05:53:16 AM
Donovan McNabb rumored to be coming to Nashville?  :ye_gods:



Michigan is what I saw - Vikes are taking him on the cheap.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 27, 2011, 10:15:56 AM
Hasselbeck to Titans, McNabb likely to Vikings (LOL), Arizona frontrunners for Kolb. My only consolation is that Hasselbeck didn't go to AZ or SF. That would have blown ass.

'Experts' keep trying to talk me into Tarvaris Jackson- I ain't buying. Seattle now has 3 backup QBs (Leinart is en route to date rape his way through the local sororities by all accounts), plus some undrafted rookies- and we are supposed to start someone out of that group?  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 27, 2011, 10:30:40 AM
Donovan McNabb rumored to be coming to Nashville?  :ye_gods:



Michigan is what I saw - Vikes are taking him on the cheap.

 :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on July 27, 2011, 10:40:22 AM
Donovan McNabb rumored to be coming to Nashville?  :ye_gods:



Michigan Minnesota is what I saw - Vikes are taking him on the cheap.

 :facepalm:

I blame the lack of coffee this morning.  I'm not even sure where I pulled out Michigan from.  


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on July 27, 2011, 11:46:44 AM
Hasselbeck to Titans, McNabb likely to Vikings (LOL), Arizona frontrunners for Kolb. My only consolation is that Hasselbeck didn't go to AZ or SF. That would have blown ass.

'Experts' keep trying to talk me into Tarvaris Jackson- I ain't buying. Seattle now has 3 backup QBs (Leinart is en route to date rape his way through the local sororities by all accounts), plus some undrafted rookies- and we are supposed to start someone out of that group?  :ye_gods:

You make it sound like date rape is a bad thing. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on July 27, 2011, 11:51:24 AM
has anyone locked down Sexy Rexy yet?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on July 27, 2011, 12:45:54 PM
Hasselbeck to the Titans is a good move for them. McNabb to the Vikings I don't think is that bad either, but really, he SHOULD just have to hand off to Peterson and toss the odd TD. They can't get much worse than they were with Favre at QB last year because Favre was fucking AWFUL. But the Seahawks? I really cannot see what the fuck they are thinking. Whitehurst is your best option, or at least you'd think so based on what they traded for him. Tavaris Jackson? I can't even say that with a straight face. The Hawks are going to be face-fucking bad this year. It will be painful to watch them. It really looks like the Rams knew what they were doing with Bradford, because he is now the best QB in that division and can apparently carry a team through the NFL's version of the National Paraplegic League. If Arizona was serious, they'd whisper some sweet nothings in the Broncos' ears and get Kyle Orton. Neckbeard can sling it. Kolb would be the "sexier" option, but the Eagles are going to price themselves out of that trade. Kolb will be the highest priced backup to a convicted felon in the league.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on July 27, 2011, 01:29:55 PM
Kolb is overrated.  He wasn't that good when he played for the Eagles.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 27, 2011, 01:39:44 PM
Kolb is overrated.  He wasn't that good when he played for the Eagles.

Kolb is untested in my view.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on July 27, 2011, 01:42:16 PM
Maybe you could say that.  When he played he looked like shit.  It's the same feeling I got from Garrett Gilbert in the national title game versus Alabama.  Yeah, he hasn't played a lot but I'm not optimistic. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on July 27, 2011, 01:47:01 PM
He looked inconsistent, which comes from that untested bit. He's probably got the chops to be a decent starting QB on the right team, but the Eagles haven't really let him show how bad or good he can be. They knew Vick was their guy after week 1, so they only used Kolb when they had to, and then it was right back to Vick. Someone is likely to trade too much for him because of how bad some of the QB situations in the NFL are (HELLO CARDINALS!). A terrible Kolb would be an improvement. It will come down to whether the Eagles want to eat the cost of that huge contract they gave him to ride the pine as a "What if?" or want to take less than top value for him in a trade.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 27, 2011, 01:47:10 PM
Maybe you could say that.  When he played he looked like shit.  It's the same feeling I got from Garrett Gilbert in the national title game versus Alabama.  Yeah, he hasn't played a lot but I'm not optimistic. 

I think you are forgetting his game against Atlanta early in October. He absolutely drilled a very good Falcons team.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on July 27, 2011, 02:57:18 PM
Yeah, I got to work and found McNabb maybe at Vikes.  Sucks to be them!  I'm...OK with Hasselbeck at the Titans, they cut Young and Old Man Drinky McDrinksalot retired. 



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Hoax on July 28, 2011, 08:38:26 AM
Who gets Namdi is so much more interesting then these not so great QB's shuffling around. If Caron Palmer ends up somewhere it could have playoff implications ( even outside of the NFC west) though I'd put money on him continuing to choke terribly.

I think the 49ers have positioned themselves well, if Arizona doesn't take up the Eagles crazy offer perhaps they can trade Clements for Kolb, after picking up Namdi of course. Not my team but it'd be nice to get to watch good football every sunday.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 28, 2011, 10:36:07 AM
My prediction, the NFC west will continue to be a never-ending embarrassment to the sport of football.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 28, 2011, 11:28:47 AM
My prediction, the NFC west will continue to be a never-ending embarrassment to the sport of football.

And yet 3 of the 4 teams have been to a Super Bowl more recently than your beloved Cowboys (49ers missed it by a year). Rams are going to be a lot better, and if SF and Arizona unfuck their QB situations they will also be better. Seattle is another, more depressing story. Although rah rah Carroll may surprise me.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on July 28, 2011, 11:30:53 AM
There's a reason Pete Carroll was coaching college. He's already fucked up two jobs as head coach in the NFL. He's going for the trifecta with the Hawks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 28, 2011, 11:38:51 AM
My prediction, the NFC west will continue to be a never-ending embarrassment to the sport of football.

And yet 3 of the 4 teams have been to a Super Bowl more recently than your beloved Cowboys (49ers missed it by a year). Rams are going to be a lot better, and if SF and Arizona unfuck their QB situations they will also be better. Seattle is another, more depressing story. Although rah rah Carroll may surprise me.

Funny, because the Cowboys play in a division with two double digit win teams. Just like the North and the South that had 2 and 3 double digit win teams. When's the last time that happened in the NFC West? Oh that's right, 2003. That division has been total ass since they realigned in 2002 and created it as a joke for football fans.

Oh and all those West teams lost the Super Bowl. Who cares if they "made it", even the Falcons managed to pull that off one year. What about the Bills, they "made it" too!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bungee on July 28, 2011, 12:12:05 PM
My prediction, the NFC west will continue to be a never-ending embarrassment to the sport of football.

And yet 3 of the 4 teams have been to a Super Bowl more recently than your beloved Cowboys (49ers missed it by a year). Rams are going to be a lot better, and if SF and Arizona unfuck their QB situations they will also be better. Seattle is another, more depressing story. Although rah rah Carroll may surprise me.

Funny, because the Cowboys play in a division with two double digit win teams. Just like the North and the South that had 2 and 3 double digit win teams. When's the last time that happened in the NFC West? Oh that's right, 2003. That division has been total ass since they realigned in 2002 and created it as a joke for football fans.

Oh and all those West teams lost the Super Bowl. Who cares if they "made it", even the Falcons managed to pull that off one year. What about the Bills, they "made it" too!

Those "made it" teams did win when it counted though. Like, win in the playoffs (except for the big dance...). When's the last time a Cowboys team managed that?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 28, 2011, 12:24:58 PM
Jan. 9th, 2010. Cowboys 34 - Eagles 14. NFC Divisional Playoff game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on July 28, 2011, 12:26:44 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVuQ5aw0HAQ


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 28, 2011, 12:28:29 PM
Wake me if the Seachickens win 8 games this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on July 28, 2011, 12:46:23 PM
Wake me if the Seachickens win 8 games this year.

Why? They only need 7.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on July 28, 2011, 12:52:01 PM
Kolb to the Cardinals (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6812979/arizona-cardinals-complete-trade-philadelphia-eagles-kevin-kolb-sources-say)

Kolb gets another 5-year contract extension worth $63 million ($22 million guaranteed). Eagles get Rodgers-Cromartie and a 2nd round pick. Look, I think Kolb is good, but he's not worth as much money and/or talent as has already been spent on him. He hasn't done anywhere near enough to justify all that. It shows just how important the QB position is these days though, when a guy with potential and less than 6 starts who wasn't even a first-round pick gets all this spending going.

It does make the Cards better, of course, but I think I could complete more passes than Derek Anderson did last year. So we have two good QB's in that division (Kolb, Bradford), two really bad or untested ones (Tavaris Jackson and Whitehurst) and one mediocre first round washout (Alex Smith). And Arizona's defense got worse - their passing D was 10th in the league in yards/game last year and unless they sign Namdi (which will be crazy expensive), I don't see it getting any better. Also, Kevin? Might want to get used to the taste of those new Astroturf pebbles, because you are going to be eating them A LOT this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on July 28, 2011, 12:55:49 PM
I had already gone on record stating that Kolb is going to be a huge bust.  Now with this new contract it is almost guaranteed. :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on July 28, 2011, 12:58:15 PM
Also, Reggie Bush traded to Miami. That to me is a WTF, Saints? Yes, he's never going to be a 1,000 yard rusher, and he's fragile as an ice sculpture at a space heater convention. But he does some really amazing things on the field in terms of making the other team gameplan around him. Guess they just got tired of relying on him.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 28, 2011, 01:25:51 PM
Cards probably win the division with the Kolb move. He can make them an 8-8 team.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on July 28, 2011, 01:34:37 PM
Glad to see the Titans release VY.  I've never liked that guy.  He's a punk and a very sketchy NFL QB. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on July 28, 2011, 01:37:17 PM
Also, Reggie Bush traded to Miami. That to me is a WTF, Saints? Yes, he's never going to be a 1,000 yard rusher, and he's fragile as an ice sculpture at a space heater convention. But he does some really amazing things on the field in terms of making the other team gameplan around him. Guess they just got tired of relying on him.

Really surprised there wasn't a push for him by the Seahawks... really thought Carroll would try to get the band back together again.

And I love what the Browns are doing to address the gaping hole at both WR and DE... nothing. Nothing says we are only going to try and work out the kinks this year rather than win than the Browns...every year since 99.  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on July 28, 2011, 01:44:20 PM
Bush is already a year or two past the average NFL running back lifespan, with no particular indication that he's going to be a resilient guy injury-wise (in fact he hasn't played all 16 games since his rookie year, and is coming off a season where he only got into 8 games at all), so I think there's a very good chance he won't be worth whatever he ends up getting paid from here on out.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 28, 2011, 01:50:39 PM
Miami has a history for signing terrible RBs lately. Plus, their current RB depth chart includes two rooks from Arizona and K State. They need some kind of vet at that position or they might as well just put a giant red target on Chad Henne.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on July 28, 2011, 02:01:00 PM
Here's a good little blog article from ESPN on Kolb (http://espn.go.com/blog/nfcwest/post/_/id/41438/the-cardinals-big-bet-on-kevin-kolb). 

The best part is the chart at the bottom that shows that Brees is the only second round QB worth a shit in the past 15 years of the draft.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 28, 2011, 02:05:58 PM
Quote
Really surprised there wasn't a push for him by the Seahawks... really thought Carroll would try to get the band back together again.

Seahawks already have enough undersized RBs with Forsett and Leon Washington, thanks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on July 28, 2011, 03:18:48 PM
Glad to see the Titans release VY.  I've never liked that guy.  He's a punk and a very sketchy NFL QB. 

VY had some amazing games, but...man.  He just couldn't keep his head together.  Maybe if he gets hungry and humble someone can still get some mileage out of him.  But currently he's a head case.

Meanwhile, the Lions have signed three of their four draftees.  Very interested in how Titus Young does;  it wouldn't be a Detroit draft without a WR pick! 

Oh and a special "HA HA" to the Cowboys for trading for Roy Williams.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on July 28, 2011, 03:49:40 PM
Also, Reggie Bush traded to Miami. That to me is a WTF, Saints? Yes, he's never going to be a 1,000 yard rusher, and he's fragile as an ice sculpture at a space heater convention. But he does some really amazing things on the field in terms of making the other team gameplan around him. Guess they just got tired of relying on him.

Maybe the stack of injuries has reduced him to non-star quality.

Granted, he hasn't put up superstar numbers, but still, he's been an offensive force, a player that a defense had to be aware of, and mandated defensive adjustments.

But injuries (and age, though Bush is in his prime still, age 26) have a way of siphoning athleticism and effectiveness…


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 28, 2011, 03:59:13 PM
Haynesworth and Ochocinco to the Pats. Saw Belichick called 'The Douchebag Whisperer' on Twitter  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 28, 2011, 04:04:01 PM
Haynesworth and Ochocinco to the Pats. Saw Belichick called 'The Douchebag Whisperer' on Twitter  :awesome_for_real:

They can make something out of Chad. I'm pretty sure nobody can turn Haynesworth into a productive member of society.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on July 28, 2011, 08:38:24 PM
No, but Belichick can certain get some defensive production out of the fatass.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on July 28, 2011, 10:14:46 PM
No, but Belichick can certain get some defensive production out of the fatass.

Fuck, Belichick is going to win the goddamned championship with all these idiots. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bungee on July 28, 2011, 11:06:24 PM
Jan. 9th, 2010. Cowboys 34 - Eagles 14. NFC Divisional Playoff game.

Who would've thought...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 29, 2011, 06:05:55 AM
No, but Belichick can certain get some defensive production out of the fatass.

Fuck, Belichick is going to win the goddamned championship with all these idiots. 

I think the Colts, Steelers, and Jets have something to say about that...



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on July 29, 2011, 06:13:14 AM
No, but Belichick can certain get some defensive production out of the fatass.

Fuck, Belichick is going to win the goddamned championship with all these idiots. 

I think the Colts, Steelers, and Jets have something to say about that...



I wouldn't back any of those teams right now... too many issues with each. Jets are probably the strongest right now of the three - I'd venture a guess as to not sleep on KC this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 29, 2011, 06:18:53 AM
Pats and Packers are the frontrunner favorites to get to the Super Bowl this year, barring injuries. Colts and Eagles are next. After that, I'd say it's tied amongst the Jets, Ravens, Falcons, Saints, and Steelers.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Segoris on July 29, 2011, 07:33:22 AM
Bigger updates for the Bears would be:
-Trading Olsen to the Panthers for a 3rd round pick. I'm not a fan of trading away Olsen at all. He is someone I think needs to be used to his potential when possible. Also, trading him to a team that already has a solid starting TE in Schockey just sucks for Olsen imo.

-They also picked up Roy Williams. After Dallas' experiences with him I'd say that's no good, but then remembering his best years were under Martz this may not be so bad

- Daniel Manning is now on the Texans (who also picked up Johnathan Joseph and are quickly sealing up their weak secondary).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on July 29, 2011, 07:43:05 AM
The Olson trade is retarded, but you know, Mike Martz. He doesn't know how to use a pass-catching TE. I can't fault the logic of a Pats/Pack Super Bowl. The Colts have serious depth issues, I'm not sold on Michael Vick repeating last year's performance with the Eagles, the Ravens seriously need a deep threat and they lost Stallworth, the Saints running game is injury-prone. The Falcons and Steelers may be the best bets to challenge the Pats/Pack matchup.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 29, 2011, 07:52:55 AM
Roy Williams sucks. Good luck Bears!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on July 29, 2011, 09:50:02 AM
Who gets Namdi is so much more interesting then these not so great QB's shuffling around. If Caron Palmer ends up somewhere it could have playoff implications ( even outside of the NFC west) though I'd put money on him continuing to choke terribly. .

Late to the party but Palmer is going nowhere but retirement.  Mike Brown hath spoken.  Palmer is costing him money so he stays with the Bungles or takes retirement.  Brown is an utter cock when you cost him his precious lucre, because that is all he cares about.  He'll spend money to keep his team just enough on the competitive edge that seats will remain filled but only that far.  

Anything beyond that is sheer luck.

Haynesworth and Ochocinco to the Pats. Saw Belichick called 'The Douchebag Whisperer' on Twitter  :awesome_for_real:

They can make something out of Chad. I'm pretty sure nobody can turn Haynesworth into a productive member of society.

Chad's biggest problem is he was never leashed.  Once he realized all that mattered was getting people in the seats to see him, he stopped trying.   He was the biggest poison pill on the Bengals.  Lots of people locally want to blame him, but I note that the other loudmouths who have been traded or went free-agent  over the years have been kept quiet by the teams they went to.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 29, 2011, 10:42:42 AM
I've never hoped any owner got struck by lightning as much as Mike Brown. The NFL would be a better place if he and Davis went of a cliff in the same limo.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 29, 2011, 10:52:29 AM
I've never hoped any owner got struck by lightning as much as Mike Brown. The NFL would be a better place if he and Davis went of a cliff in the same limo.

And landed on Jerry Jones and Dan Snyder.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on July 29, 2011, 10:53:19 AM
Jerry's a shitheel, but he will spend money to win.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on July 29, 2011, 10:59:37 AM
That's part of the problem.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on July 29, 2011, 11:12:37 AM
If the giants resign Plaxico its going to be a major  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Stewie on July 29, 2011, 01:21:41 PM
As a huge huge Dolphins fan, I gotta say I'm not to keen on the Bush trade/signing, I woulda preferred Sproles or Bradshaw.
When you look at the Saints stats, they got more yards, scored more and won more without him.
He has a ridiculously high rate of fumbling.
Once he is over 10 carries /game is average yards per carry drop dramatically (and it wasn't spectacular to begin with). Same goes for his receptions. Also when you look at the yards he gets after 1st contact and its abysmal. 
He is not even that good of a PR guy.

I just don't know what he brings that a ton of other back could do just as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Segoris on July 29, 2011, 01:44:03 PM
Roy Williams sucks. Good luck Bears!

I want to agree but he's being re-united with Martz in an offense he was productive in so I'm trying to stay hopeful.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: stu on July 29, 2011, 02:14:30 PM
As a huge huge Dolphins fan, I gotta say I'm not to keen on the Bush trade/signing, I woulda preferred Sproles or Bradshaw.


I started getting excited when Bradshaw's name came up. Bush just seemed to come out of left field.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on July 29, 2011, 04:39:33 PM
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6816873/nnamdi-asomugha-agrees-five-year-60-million-deal-philadelphia-eagles-source-says

LMAO...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on July 31, 2011, 11:54:30 AM
A lot of I think bigger transactions that aren't getting reported thanks to Plaxico signing with the Jets.

Cullen Jenkins signed with the Eagles. They are starting to look like they will be a real defensive monster this year. They weren't bad last year but two really good corners and a decent pass rush DE.

Marion Barber goes to the Bears. Normally, this would be a bigger deal, but Barber has absolutely fallen off a cliff in terms of production the last two years. In a Mike Martz offense, I don't know that he'll have that big a role.

Darren Sproles goes to the Saints. Perfect replacement for Reggie Bush. Has the speed, punt return and pass catching ability.

Mike Sims-Walker goes to the Rams. Hey, Sam Bradford might actually have a weapon.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on July 31, 2011, 12:00:01 PM
Seahawks released Lofa Tatupu when he wouldn't restructure his deal. Carroll better get where he is going with this team quickly, because he is confusing and alienating a metric shitton of the casual fans by dumping the only guys on the roster they could name. I would venture to guess that 60% of the jerseys (at least) on game day are Hasselbeck and Tatupu, and they are both gone now. Mine is Walter Jones, but I am still gonna wear it since he retired and is headed to the HoF instead of being cast aside to play for another team. If I was going to invest in another right now I think it would be Earl Thomas.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 01, 2011, 08:30:39 AM
Carroll is a shitty NFL coach.  He won at USC because of the talent and his coordinators, and in the NFL coaching the Seahawks is the equivalent of coaching the Kentucky Wildcats or Kansas Jayhawks.  He would have sucked at those schools because of the talent drop off. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 01, 2011, 08:33:06 AM
Seahawks released Lofa Tatupu when he wouldn't restructure his deal.

That was... unwise.  :uhrr:

I don't know what the fuck Carroll is doing - makes no sense to me. More and more I think that division is coming down to the Rams and the Cards. It's a tossup either way. The Cards have better talent but the Rams have Bradford. Just saw that Todd Heap signed with the Cardinals. He'll be good the 8 games he plays healthy.

James Jones resigned with the Packers. I'm actually happy about that. If he could just be more consistent with his hands, he's a solid #2. He gets the dropsies way too often.

The Redskins got Cofield from the Giants and Tim Hightower from the Cardinals. I think that'll be a better defensive team this year, but the offense is going to keep that team out of a lot of games.

Vince Young to the Eagles? WTF? Did they really need two running QB's with behavior problems?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 03, 2011, 12:24:55 PM
More free agency signings:

Ronnie Brown goes to the Eagles. That's a good pickup for them, as he won't have to be the top guy and can still provide some good yards.

Michael Jenkins from the Falcons to the Vikings. Not really a replacement for Sidney Rice. McNabb is going to find it hard going in Minnesota.

Zach Miller signs with the Seahawks. Best signing they've made this offseason. Jackson will need a bit TE he can dump the ball off to when he's running for his fucking life.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 03, 2011, 12:29:19 PM
Where the hell were the Eagles hiding this money? Switzerland?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 03, 2011, 12:36:07 PM
Quote
Zach Miller signs with the Seahawks. Best signing they've made this offseason. Jackson will need a bit TE he can dump the ball off to when he's running for his fucking life.

And he replaces another fan favorite (and also very young player) John Carlson, further alienating an already annoyed fan base. When Pete Carroll gets fired there will be parties in the street.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 03, 2011, 12:47:06 PM
To be fair, if alienating the base is what it takes to win, you can get a new base. Not that I'm saying Carroll will win, but I'd rather go up or down with my guys in the lineup than the leftovers that haven't won in the previous years.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on August 03, 2011, 01:45:46 PM
Where the hell were the Eagles hiding this money? Switzerland?

They have been pretty stingy the last few years.  I think they were $20MM under the cap in 2009, which is a lot.  I could be off.

They might have to give up Assante.  I won't like seeing that but he isn't staying for a 1 year contract.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 03, 2011, 02:07:44 PM
As a Cowboys fan, I hope you are forced to play Vince Young for 4 games this season.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on August 04, 2011, 07:25:26 AM
In all honesty, that has a reasonable chance of happening.   I just hope Young's reps are in week 5 (Bills) and week 13 (Seahawks).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 04, 2011, 07:29:07 AM
I wouldn't sleep on the Bills this year. They are showing signs of promise after last season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 04, 2011, 04:17:11 PM
I wouldn't sleep on the Bills this year. They are showing signs of promise after last season.

 :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 04, 2011, 04:33:43 PM
I wouldn't sleep on the Bills this year. They are showing signs of promise after last season.

 :awesome_for_real:

Laugh it up, but they will win some games against teams that overlook them this year. They won 4 last year, and I think they can win 7 this year. Fitzpatrick isn't a bad QB, he just spends a ton of time on his back because their OL is was injured, inexperienced, or just terrible. Now, I think they will have that better sorted out and hopefully healthier, giving Fitz more time to do his thing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: stu on August 04, 2011, 09:27:53 PM
The Bills lost three OT heartbreakers to the Ravens, Steelers and Chiefs last year, so if they've improved I wouldn't take them lightly. Plus, Fitzpatrick is fun to watch. I think he out-gained his RBs a couple times last year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on August 05, 2011, 12:36:30 PM
The Bills lost three OT heartbreakers to the Ravens, Steelers and Chiefs last year, so if they've improved I wouldn't take them lightly. Plus, Fitzpatrick is fun to watch. I think he out-gained his RBs a couple times last year.

Those schemes will not work this year due to the prevalence of film.  Fitzpatrick ain't no Vick.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 05, 2011, 12:37:11 PM
Those schemes will not work this year due to the prevalence of film.  Fitzpatrick ain't no Vick.

There's no film on the Bills. I mean come on. They blacked out all the games.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 05, 2011, 01:29:25 PM
More signings:

Le'Ron McCLain from the Ravens to the Chiefs. They list him as a fullback but he could play tailback on most teams. He's also a damn good pass catcher and runner.

Legedu Naanee from the Charagers to the Panthers. Naanee has some speed, though don't know if he has the skills to make it big as a wideout. He might at least provide some deep threat for Cam Newton.

Jerious Norwood from the Falcons to the Rams. A good, hard-hitting running back to give Stephen Jackson a rest.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 06, 2011, 06:43:38 AM
I wouldn't sleep on the Bills this year. They are showing signs of promise after last season.

 :awesome_for_real:

Laugh it up, but they will win some games against teams that overlook them this year. They won 4 last year, and I think they can win 7 this year. Fitzpatrick isn't a bad QB, he just spends a ton of time on his back because their OL is was injured, inexperienced, or just terrible. Now, I think they will have that better sorted out and hopefully healthier, giving Fitz more time to do his thing.

I will guarantee that they will win more games than the Seahawks. 

 :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 12, 2011, 01:46:58 PM
Another big (IMO) signing I saw yesterday. Steve Smith from the Giants to the Eagles. Now, granted, he won't be healthy until October, but when he's healthy, he's damn good. That receiving corps is already pretty stacked with Jackson, Avant and Maclin (the latter two aren't great, but they are good enough). The Eagles really are making a go big or go home sort of statement here. You'd be crazy not to tap them as favorites to win the East but now that the Giants are weaker at receiver (we saw how bad they were without Smith last year), Dallas hasn't really done anything to improve and the Skins are going with John Beck and Rex Grossman as their QB options. Good luck with that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 12, 2011, 04:06:54 PM
I am not looking forward to this season, no. I fucking hate the Eagles so much.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 12, 2011, 04:22:35 PM
I am not looking forward to this season, no. I fucking hate the Eagles so much.

They are going to suck. They didn't learn anything from the Miami experiment. Throwing a bunch of big names onto a football will not win you a championship. They will make the playoffs but that's only because the Giants aren't great, the Cowboys are rebuilding with a new coach, and the Redskins are fucking awful.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 12, 2011, 04:35:29 PM
"Sucking less than the Giants" is still a recipe for a shitty season for me.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on August 12, 2011, 05:17:07 PM
I am not looking forward to this season, no. I fucking hate the Eagles so much.

I wouldn't give a shit about the Iggles except I've got a buddy of mine from PA who won't stop texting me or shut the fuck up about whatever bit of random trivia comes out of their camp or how any random player of theirs is somehow a hall of fame lock.

Personally, looking at the Ravens, I see we seem to be looking at some of the same questions as last year - questionable O-line and Cam Cameron possibly continuing  alternating between getting too cute/too conservative, though we also now have the added bonus of a giant gaping hole in the #2 QB slot.   On the upside, no more god damn 3 man rush stupidity.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 12, 2011, 05:30:14 PM
The Ravens are going to take a step back unless Flacco miraculously grows some accuracy. Losing Derrick Mason is really going to hurt that team, no matter how old he is, especially when they also lost Donte Stallworth, their only real deep threat. They will have to rely on the D a lot more. In a division with the Steelers and an improving Browns team (who will also still suck, IMO) at least they can look forward to pounding a floundering Bengals team.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on August 13, 2011, 02:56:34 AM
The Ravens are going to take a step back unless Flacco miraculously grows some accuracy. Losing Derrick Mason is really going to hurt that team, no matter how old he is, especially when they also lost Donte Stallworth, their only real deep threat. They will have to rely on the D a lot more. In a division with the Steelers and an improving Browns team (who will also still suck, IMO) at least they can look forward to pounding a floundering Bengals team.

Sadly, it's the Steeler's division to lose this year. The Browns are going with a "draft the talent" building approach which translates into a an NFL development squad. Switching to a west coast offense and then NOT going after any receivers is going to doom them for years. Ravens have more holes this year on an aging team and the Bengals are still the Bengals.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on August 13, 2011, 11:27:42 AM
These aren't the old Bengals!

No, really.  Apparently there's only one returning vet player.  Hilarious.  I can only hope none of the games sell out so I can actually watch football this year instead of being forced to watch the Bengals week after week. I don't even root for the goddamn team yet I'm forced to tolerate them :-P


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on August 13, 2011, 01:07:38 PM
Still puzzling over NFL rule change to move kickoff to 35 yard line.

Yeah, the deafening clamor for more touchbacks.

Now we can be presented with a sequence of a 35 yard field goal and touchback spread over several commercials.

Somebody tweet me when the game action is live again.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on August 14, 2011, 07:27:27 AM
Giants might be really, really bad this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on August 14, 2011, 08:19:42 AM
Still puzzling over NFL rule change to move kickoff to 35 yard line.

Yeah, the deafening clamor for more touchbacks.

It's a safety thing, along with limiting the running start by the kicking team to only five yards.  I don't know if it those were the superior options over 25yd touchbacks and killing wedges off entirely, but it's progress.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 14, 2011, 12:57:52 PM
Giants might be really, really bad this year.

Yeah, I think you are correct. Get used to seeing the Eli face A LOT.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 14, 2011, 01:07:41 PM
Still puzzling over NFL rule change to move kickoff to 35 yard line.

Yeah, the deafening clamor for more touchbacks.

It's a safety thing, along with limiting the running start by the kicking team to only five yards.  I don't know if it those were the superior options over 25yd touchbacks and killing wedges off entirely, but it's progress.

Had to happen. The NFL is fighting concussions on too many fronts, and bad injuries due to kickoffs were high on that list. Is it boring? Yeah. But it also provides for some strategy by your special teams units if you want to catch people off guard.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on August 14, 2011, 01:36:53 PM
Still puzzling over NFL rule change to move kickoff to 35 yard line.

Yeah, the deafening clamor for more touchbacks.

It's a safety thing, along with limiting the running start by the kicking team to only five yards.  I don't know if it those were the superior options over 25yd touchbacks and killing wedges off entirely, but it's progress.

Had to happen. The NFL is fighting concussions on too many fronts, and bad injuries due to kickoffs were high on that list. Is it boring? Yeah. But it also provides for some strategy by your special teams units if you want to catch people off guard.

If kickoff returns are such a safety issue, then just plant the ball on the 20 (or 30 or 35 or whatever) and forego the touchback play.

What about punt returns?

Hey, I am all in favor getting rid of kickers -- it's an appendage that should be scuttled.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 14, 2011, 01:42:41 PM
Because if you just put it on the 20 you have no option to run it out late in the game, or onside kick, or pooch kick, or other strategic plays when it matters.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on August 14, 2011, 01:52:06 PM
Still puzzling over NFL rule change to move kickoff to 35 yard line.

Yeah, the deafening clamor for more touchbacks.

It's a safety thing, along with limiting the running start by the kicking team to only five yards.  I don't know if it those were the superior options over 25yd touchbacks and killing wedges off entirely, but it's progress.

Had to happen. The NFL is fighting concussions on too many fronts, and bad injuries due to kickoffs were high on that list. Is it boring? Yeah. But it also provides for some strategy by your special teams units if you want to catch people off guard.

I think the NFL competition committee should start looking into the elimination of tackling. Imagine the impact that would have on the number of injuries.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 14, 2011, 01:56:59 PM
 :oh_i_see:

Don't be obtuse. Moving the kickoff line is a small change. Especially since it's been there before in the past.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 14, 2011, 05:57:54 PM
Giants might be really, really bad this year.

Yeah, I think you are correct. Get used to seeing the Eli face A LOT.


(http://manningface.s3.amazonaws.com/images/1262941033_eli.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on August 14, 2011, 06:11:38 PM
:oh_i_see:

Don't be obtuse. Moving the kickoff line is a small change. Especially since it's been there before in the past.

Kickers kick the ball farther than they used to. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on August 15, 2011, 07:09:01 AM
That receiving corps is already pretty stacked with Jackson, Avant and Maclin (the latter two aren't great, but they are good enough).

Maclin almost died from an ongoing rare disease.  I don't think he plays this season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 15, 2011, 07:33:14 AM
Let's not forget that Steve Smith just moved to Phili.  He could have a productive season there.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on August 15, 2011, 08:34:03 AM
My Giants didn't look good at all.  But since I'm a fan and I'm always optimistic, I'm going to chalk up Saturday's performance to:

They've been practicing for just a short while.
Their offensive line is a bit shuffled.
It's preseason.

I'm not that worried about the loss of Steve Smith yet.  Nicks and Manningham both were able to snag 2000+ yards and a ton of TDs and each didn't start the whole year.

Our defense looked good though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 15, 2011, 08:43:52 AM
Nicks and Manningham are good but they were a lot better when they weren't the only options. If the O-line has to shuffle around, Manning is going to take a lot more pressure and we all know that's when Eli starts tossing balls to the wrong team. If the running game isn't solid, it will be a LONG year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on August 15, 2011, 12:34:24 PM
I know I am salivating.  The NFC East is in our hands unless Vick gets his legs broken early in the season.  Tony OhNo, a hapless Redskins team and a 4 sacked a game Eli...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: gimpyone on August 15, 2011, 06:56:32 PM
My Giants didn't look good at all.  But since I'm a fan and I'm always optimistic, I'm going to chalk up Saturday's performance to:

They've been practicing for just a short while.
Their offensive line is a bit shuffled.
It's preseason.

I'm not that worried about the loss of Steve Smith yet.  Nicks and Manningham both were able to snag 2000+ yards and a ton of TDs and each didn't start the whole year.

Our defense looked good though.

Could be worse; you could be a niners fan.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on August 15, 2011, 06:59:29 PM
:cry2:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 15, 2011, 07:34:44 PM
I know I am salivating.  The NFC East is in our hands unless Vick gets his legs broken early in the season.  Tony OhNo, a hapless Redskins team and a 4 sacked a game Eli...

I think you are going to be very disappointed. I'm not saying you won't win the division, I just don't think building your team around five free agent big names and filling the gaps with rookies or young utility talent is a recipe for success in the playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on August 16, 2011, 03:30:59 AM
Just got an email from Yahoo...are we donig the obligatory Pick 'Em league again this year?  I look forward to dominating all you jokers once again.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on August 16, 2011, 04:40:28 AM
Just got an email from Yahoo...are we donig the obligatory Pick 'Em league again this year?  I look forward to dominating all you jokers once again.

Ask you shall receive!   Invites sent to all of last years participants. Link info below for people that want to join in and play ESPN analyst.

http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com/pickem/register/joingroup
Group ID# 22848
Password: F13


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on August 16, 2011, 04:47:11 AM
Awesome, you the man.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 16, 2011, 07:41:51 AM
Just got an email from Yahoo...are we donig the obligatory Pick 'Em league again this year?  I look forward to dominating all you jokers once again.

We shall see...

(http://bengaliboypaul.com/Webpics/stewie-pipe.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on August 16, 2011, 07:57:19 AM
Ok... signed up. But as a Browns fan, I am already fucked. Someone spot me 21 pts.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on August 17, 2011, 01:02:31 AM
Just got an email from Yahoo...are we donig the obligatory Pick 'Em league again this year?  I look forward to dominating all you jokers once again.

We shall see...

(http://bengaliboypaul.com/Webpics/stewie-pipe.gif)

I believe I am undefeated in F13 pick 'em leagues (last two years).  I've even told you all my secret to victory*, yet you still manage to mess it up!

*which also explains why the Browns almost always lose.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on August 17, 2011, 06:59:06 AM
Nicks and Manningham are good but they were a lot better when they weren't the only options. If the O-line has to shuffle around, Manning is going to take a lot more pressure and we all know that's when Eli starts tossing balls to the wrong team. If the running game isn't solid, it will be a LONG year.

Neither of them are the kind of premier receiver that opens up the running game either in my opinion.  The reason the Giants were so nasty with Plaxico is you just couldn't cover him with one guy.  It does great things for your team when you can force a double whenever you want.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 17, 2011, 07:52:58 AM
I think with Steve Smith out there, the three of them could open up the running game - but he's gone now, and yeah, you're right, they don't have someone who can do it by himself like Plax could.

But Eli is confident he's an elite QB in Tom Brady's league.  :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on August 17, 2011, 08:02:57 AM
I think with Steve Smith out there, the three of them could open up the running game - but he's gone now, and yeah, you're right, they don't have someone who can do it by himself like Plax could.

But Eli is confident he's an elite QB in Tom Brady's league.  :facepalm:

I think he meant he was more a 6th round value rather than first.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on August 17, 2011, 12:45:35 PM
I know I am salivating.  The NFC East is in our hands unless Vick gets his legs broken early in the season.  Tony OhNo, a hapless Redskins team and a 4 sacked a game Eli...

Oh look another Eagle fan who doesn't know what the hell they're talking about.

The Giants were the least sacked team last year. (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?archive=true&conference=null&role=TM&offensiveStatisticCategory=OFFENSIVE_LINE&defensiveStatisticCategory=null&season=2010&seasonType=REG&tabSeq=2&qualified=true&Submit=Go)



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 17, 2011, 12:54:51 PM
Real NFC East fans know Eli tossed up the most picks in the NFL last year (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=1&season=2010&seasonType=REG&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&statisticPositionCategory=QUARTERBACK&d-447263-s=PASSING_INTERCEPTIONS&qualified=true)  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on August 17, 2011, 12:55:57 PM
Nicks and Manningham are good but they were a lot better when they weren't the only options. If the O-line has to shuffle around, Manning is going to take a lot more pressure and we all know that's when Eli starts tossing balls to the wrong team. If the running game isn't solid, it will be a LONG year.

Neither of them are the kind of premier receiver that opens up the running game either in my opinion.  The reason the Giants were so nasty with Plaxico is you just couldn't cover him with one guy.  It does great things for your team when you can force a double whenever you want.

They're not? I guess #6 rushing team in the league last year couldn't open up the running game.  

I think with Steve Smith out there, the three of them could open up the running game - but he's gone now, and yeah, you're right, they don't have someone who can do it by himself like Plax could.

But Eli is confident he's an elite QB in Tom Brady's league.  :facepalm:

Steve Smith doesn't open the passing game.  He's was an intermediate receiver, he worked in traffic.  Since when does a team need 3 WRs to "open the running game".

Now if you want to comment on if Nicks can stay healthy the whole season to make a mark, you'd have an argument.

As far as Eli's comment goes I'm guessing you never read the original quote.

When e was asked if "[he] was in the same league as Tom Brady,"  he answered:

Quote
"I consider myself in that class," said Manning, the MVP of Super Bowl XLII. "Tom Brady is a great quarterback, he's a great player and what you've seen with him is he's gotten better every year. He started off winning championships and I think he's a better quarterback now than what he was, in all honesty, when he was winning those championships.

"I think now he's grown up and gotten better every year and that's what I'm trying to do. I kind of hope these next seven years of my quarterback days are my best."

He never said he was as good or better than Tom.  He says he hopes to be just as good too, and always improve.  I think it's a fair assessment.  I mean what do you want him to say, "Oh I'm not an elite QB, I'm actually not good.  People hate me."  Yeah, you find me an elite athlete that will say that and I'll buy you a beer.

It's a stupid non-story.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 17, 2011, 12:56:46 PM
Real NFC East fans know Eli tossed up the most picks in the NFL last year (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=1&season=2010&seasonType=REG&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&statisticPositionCategory=QUARTERBACK&d-447263-s=PASSING_INTERCEPTIONS&qualified=true)  :awesome_for_real:

Eli Manning-  31 TDs and 25 picks
Tom Brady-  36 TDs and 4 picks  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on August 17, 2011, 01:04:51 PM
Real NFC East fans know Eli tossed up the most picks in the NFL last year (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=1&season=2010&seasonType=REG&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&statisticPositionCategory=QUARTERBACK&d-447263-s=PASSING_INTERCEPTIONS&qualified=true)  :awesome_for_real:

True, I'd argue the number was inflated by the number of INTs that came because his WRs couldn't fucking catch a ball with their hands.  But that only accounts for like 5-7 of them.

Why does no one bring up precious Drew Brees threw three less INTs than Eli?   :oh_i_see:

Edit to add:

Eli Manning-  31 TDs and 25 picks
Tom Brady-  36 TDs and 4 picks  :grin:

Drew Brees- 33 TD and 22 picks.  I guess he's not elite either. :(


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 17, 2011, 01:39:49 PM
No one brings it up because Brees at least made the playoffs last year.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on August 17, 2011, 01:41:48 PM
The Giants had a 10 win season and only missed the playoffs on a tiebreaker, they were hardly a bad team.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 17, 2011, 01:42:37 PM
I wouldn't argue they were a particularly GOOD team either.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 17, 2011, 01:42:59 PM
However, the Saints didn't lose to the Seahawks because Brees tossed up picks.

They lose because their defense BLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOWS


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 17, 2011, 01:44:42 PM
BEAST MODE!!!!!!!!!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on August 17, 2011, 01:45:56 PM
No one brings it up because Brees at least made the playoffs last year.  :awesome_for_real:

Hmm I can't remember how the Saints team finished last year.  It couldn't of been a loss to the only team in the history of the NFL to get into the playoffs with a losing records could it?  

I wouldn't argue they were a particularly GOOD team either.

The Giants were statistically the 5th best Offense and the 7th best Defense in the league.  I think they're in pretty good shape going into this season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 17, 2011, 01:51:24 PM
I'm not a big fan of Brees, no. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 17, 2011, 03:15:30 PM
I'm not a big fan of Brees, no. 

I believe that Brees may be the best technical QB ever to play the position.  If he had Peyton's brain, he'd be a god.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on August 17, 2011, 03:20:21 PM
They used to make fun of Brees for not being able to throw a slant.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 17, 2011, 03:28:32 PM
"They" meaning a group of swiss bankers?

If you've ever watched the guy throw in practice, he is the most accurate and technically sound QB I've ever seen in my life.  I'm sure being only 6' tall affects some of his live performance (particularly short, over-the-middle passes).  


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on August 17, 2011, 03:37:38 PM
"They" meaning a group of swiss bankers?

After up to the point of being benched for Doug Flutie, he was getting universally thrashed by all of the "analysts" (SI, ESPN, etc). They often made the point that he was so inaccurate and bad that he couldn't throw a slant.  We get a lot of San Diego games here in AZ and he was just that dreadful. I don't know how he turned it around, but his numbers did a 180 the next season and he won the "Chad Pennington" (comeback player of the year) for QB-that-doesn't-suck-anymore.

Just seems to be high praise for a guy that used to be a punchline and prompted the whole Philip Rivers/Eli Manning draft drama.   But then again, I'm not a NFL talent scount or QB coach and we're in the now, so you may be right.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on August 17, 2011, 03:46:01 PM
Doug Flutie was awesome!

I have nothing else to add.



-edit- I also can't type.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 17, 2011, 04:20:41 PM
Eli made some mistakes last year that probably cost the Giants a game or two, that is why people go "lol INTs" and shit with Eli. There are some games you could point to where he was definitely not helping the Giants win or actively harming them by throwing a crushing, horrible INT at the absolutely worst moment, channeling his inner Kerry Collins. Or, you know, fucking up a QB slide and fumbling (although that game was an abomination all around, that was just a :facepalm: on top of it). That's the problem with being QB, if you fuck up and it obviously hurts the team, and you lose the game, people will focus like a laser on you, even if you were hardly the only factor. And the Giants had a few games like that, and they missed the playoffs because of it, so LOLELI it is.

But shucks, it's so hard to actually hate him. Lookit that widdle puppy:

(http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/000/577/011/107687382_display_image.jpg?1292809806)


Who's a boo!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 17, 2011, 06:10:18 PM
I'm not a big fan of Brees, no. 

I believe that Brees may be the best technical QB ever to play the position.  If he had Peyton's brain, he'd be a god.

Maybe so.  He's a bit limited in the physical sense as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on August 17, 2011, 11:44:04 PM
I'm not a big fan of Brees, no. 

I believe that Brees may be the best technical QB ever to play the position.  If he had Peyton's brain, he'd be a god.

Maybe so.  He's a bit limited in the physical sense as well.

Limited because he's short for a QB, perhaps...but I think I heard tell that he's quite an athlete all around.  He even did the goal post dunk thing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 18, 2011, 07:24:08 AM
Oh, Drew Brees was FUCKING AWFUL his first few seasons in the NFL. I mean, just goddamn atrocious. I remember seeing games of his and thinking that this guy couldn't possibly be this bad, he had to be trying to fuck it up. And then his last year in San Diego, something just clicked. I mean, it helped that he got Gates at TE but even then, he got really good at throwing passes. When he went to New Orleans, he was better - though he has had moments of pure WTFery with the Saints. His second year there, I drafted him as my starting QB and it was like 6 games before he really became worthwhile. The Super Bowl season he was absolutely lights out. Last year, he threw a lot of INTs, partly because his running game was so bad - they had no Deuce to run over people, Pierre Thomas was hurt a lot, Bush was never a threatening runner and his season ended early. Many of his INTs were Brees trying to do too much.

Eli's INT's are usually for the same reason. He makes bad decisions under pressure a lot more often than a guy like Brees. Brady is one of those who can feel pressure and throw the ball out of bounds, whereas Eli is as likely to try some crazy Favre shit than throw it away. He's also got the yips - he feels pressure and tends to freak the fuck out.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 18, 2011, 07:31:26 AM
Brees is clearly a hell of a talent.  He's won a superbowl as a QB, something that is tough to do and he's put up very good numbers.  Eli is also a hell of a talent and a very good QB.  I still wouldn't put either of them in my top 25 of all time.  There's a big drop off between guys like Elway and Young compared to Brees and Eli.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 18, 2011, 08:24:26 AM
Just to be clear here, I never meant to suggest that Brees was one of the best QBs of all time in the NFL.  I was only discussing his technical ability.  Brees' mechanics and throwing accuracy are better than any QB I've seen.  His decision making and, to a lesser degree, his size will keep him from becoming one of the true elite at the position. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 18, 2011, 08:55:21 AM
See, I actually think Brees IS one of the elite QB's in the league - but I also put Favre in that category too. He's a better technical passer than Favre, much more accurate and when it's all said and done, I think you can put Brees in the Elway/Manning/Brady class.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on August 18, 2011, 09:38:08 AM
Drew Brees has been a top five QB by DYAR every season he's been in a Saints uniform.  He was 7th and 8th among QBs by DYAR his last two seasons in San Diego.

He hasn't had Manning's longer run of even better performance and he hasn't had the hilariously amazing peak of Brady's last three full seasons.  I don't even think he's as good as Philip Rivers, but sometimes, being the 3rd best CF in New York isn't a bad thing (http://www.fangraphs.com/graphsw.aspx?playerid2=1008315&playerid3=1008082&playerid4=1012230&playerid5=&wg=3).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 18, 2011, 11:44:00 AM
I can think of at least 7 guys I would rather have than Brees in the league right now:

1.  Rivers
2.  Brady
3.  Vick
4.  Rodgers
5.  Roethlisberger
6.  Manning son #1
7.  Ryan

And probably Joe Flacco and Josh Freeman as well. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 18, 2011, 11:54:25 AM
I can think of at least 7 guys I would rather have than Brees in the league right now:

1.  Rivers
2.  Brady
3.  Vick
4.  Rodgers
5.  Roethlisberger
6.  Manning son #1
7.  Ryan

And probably Joe Flacco and Josh Freeman as well. 

Were I the owner of an NFL team, I'd want:

1) Manning
2) Rogers
3) Brady
4) Brees

Vick is a meltdown waiting to happen.  Roethlessberger is too system specific.  I'm not sold on Ryan yet. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on August 18, 2011, 11:55:41 AM
Rothlesberger is also one more chance meeting with a woman from being in jail for 15-20.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 18, 2011, 11:59:46 AM
Vick is the ultimate gamble.  If he can stay clean he can bring home a couple of titles.  I think that even with a decent O-line he'll stay healthy.   I can't argue with folks that like Brees-  he's had the results. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 18, 2011, 12:06:47 PM
I can think of at least 7 guys I would rather have than Brees in the league right now:

1.  Rivers
2.  Brady
3.  Vick
4.  Rodgers
5.  Roethlisberger
6.  Manning son #1
7.  Ryan

And probably Joe Flacco and Josh Freeman as well.  

You are fucking HIGH as a kite on about half of those picks.

Vick is fucking overrated, as likely to injure himself trying to make a play as he would be to make the play itself. Roethlisberger is a winner but also takes many stupid risks with his own health. Matt Ryan is good but not on Brees' level. Flacco is horribly inconsistent and Josh Freeman is not nearly experienced enough to take over a guy like Brees.

I'd take in this order:

1) Manning
2) Brady
3) Rivers
4) Brees
5) Rodgers

And 4 & 5 are a tossup.

EDIT: And more about Vick. He is NOT going to bring hom a couple of titles. I don't think he has it in him to remain consistent enough through an entire season to bring home titles. He will electrify a crowd and he will win some games, but I honestly do not think he's smart enough to win a title.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 18, 2011, 12:18:14 PM
I hope he stays an Eagle forever then.  :why_so_serious:

I guess he could be a Cowboy too.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 18, 2011, 01:02:33 PM
I can think of at least 7 guys I would rather have than Brees in the league right now:

1.  Rivers
2.  Brady
3.  Vick
4.  Rodgers
5.  Roethlisberger
6.  Manning son #1
7.  Ryan

And probably Joe Flacco and Josh Freeman as well.  

You are fucking HIGH as a kite on about half of those picks.

Vick is fucking overrated, as likely to injure himself trying to make a play as he would be to make the play itself. Roethlisberger is a winner but also takes many stupid risks with his own health. Matt Ryan is good but not on Brees' level. Flacco is horribly inconsistent and Josh Freeman is not nearly experienced enough to take over a guy like Brees.

I'd take in this order:

1) Manning
2) Brady
3) Rivers
4) Brees
5) Rodgers

And 4 & 5 are a tossup.

EDIT: And more about Vick. He is NOT going to bring hom a couple of titles. I don't think he has it in him to remain consistent enough through an entire season to bring home titles. He will electrify a crowd and he will win some games, but I honestly do not think he's smart enough to win a title.

I bet the Eagles win the Superbowl this year. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 18, 2011, 01:04:06 PM
I bet the Eagles win the Superbowl this year.  

While the Eagles are one of the favorites, I'd still take that bet.   :grin:



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on August 18, 2011, 01:19:32 PM
Pryor eligible for supplemental draft, but must serve suspension (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/nfl/08/18/terrelle.pryor.supplemental.draft.ap/index.html)

Any thoughts? I am a bit torn. I can understand the 5 game suspension, but what about all the shit these other kids have done in college ball and just jumped ship and went to the pros? All the sudden Pryor gets stung? Then again, he was set to go back to school and then dropped it when the road crumbled out from under him. I dunno... I doubt I'd be ok if he was just allowed to be drafted and play without any penalty at all...

Of course this is all a moot point considering he would not actually be playing this year anyway... meh.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 18, 2011, 01:20:55 PM
I bet the Eagles win the Superbowl this year.  

While the Eagles are one of the favorites, I'd still take that bet.   :grin:



Same. Andy Reid will find a way to fuck it up even if his players all gel and stay healthy.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 18, 2011, 01:24:12 PM
Pryor eligible for supplemental draft, but must serve suspension (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/nfl/08/18/terrelle.pryor.supplemental.draft.ap/index.html)

Any thoughts? I am a bit torn. I can understand the 5 game suspension, but what about all the shit these other kids have done in college ball and just jumped ship and went to the pros? All the sudden Pryor gets stung? Then again, he was set to go back to school and then dropped it when the road crumbled out from under him. I dunno... I doubt I'd be ok if he was just allowed to be drafted and play without any penalty at all...

Of course this is all a moot point considering he would not actually be playing this year anyway... meh.

Apologies for double post, but WTC? That makes exactly zero sense. NCAA and NFL are in no way affiliated. Goodell is a fucking lawful good retard. NFLPA should have a field day with that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 18, 2011, 01:24:16 PM
I bet the Eagles win the Superbowl this year.  

While the Eagles are one of the favorites, I'd still take that bet.   :grin:



It's easy to take the field in the NFL.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 18, 2011, 01:25:23 PM
Any thoughts? I am a bit torn.

I say let him play.  Serving a suspension in the NFL for breaking an NCAA rule is stupid.  Perhaps it's just admission by the NCAA that they primarily pursue only those infractions involving marquis players on top tier teams.  It's not like 99% of NCAA players can jump ship to the NFL to avoid a suspension.  

It's easy to take the field in the NFL.   :grin:

You're the one that made the bet.  I'm just accepting it!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on August 18, 2011, 01:30:22 PM
I'd take Matt Ryan by far over any of these guys except for Rodgers. Why? Age. You'd be nuts to take a 34 year old Brady or a 32 year old Brees over a 26 year old Ryan for your franchise. That's a no-brainer.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 18, 2011, 01:33:23 PM
I'd take Matt Ryan by far over any of these guys except for Rodgers. Why? Age. You'd be nuts to take a 34 year old Brady or a 32 year old Brees over a 26 year old Ryan for your franchise. That's a no-brainer.

While Matt Ryan has a huge upside, he's still a gamble.  It's still unclear if he has what it takes to win a championship. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on August 18, 2011, 01:35:00 PM

Apologies for double post, but WTC? That makes exactly zero sense. NCAA and NFL are in no way affiliated. Goodell is a fucking lawful good retard. NFLPA should have a field day with that.

Probably not since they had a hand in it...

Quote
Commissioner Roger Goodell and NFLPA executive director DeMaurice Smith worked together on the decision, Rosenhaus said.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 18, 2011, 01:36:40 PM
Any thoughts? I am a bit torn.

I say let him play.  Serving a suspension in the NFL for breaking an NCAA rule is stupid.  Perhaps it's just admission by the NCAA that they primarily pursue only those infractions involving marquis players on top tier teams.  It's not like 99% of NCAA players can jump ship to the NFL to avoid a suspension.  

It's easy to take the field in the NFL.   :grin:

You're the one that made the bet.  I'm just accepting it!

Okay.  What would you like to gamble?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 18, 2011, 01:45:31 PM
Okay.  What would you like to gamble?

Just a friendly "gentlemen's wager" would suffice.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on August 18, 2011, 01:58:54 PM
I'd take Matt Ryan by far over any of these guys except for Rodgers. Why? Age. You'd be nuts to take a 34 year old Brady or a 32 year old Brees over a 26 year old Ryan for your franchise. That's a no-brainer.

While Matt Ryan has a huge upside, he's still a gamble.  It's still unclear if he has what it takes to win a championship. 

Building a team for the future?  Definitely Ryan or Freeman.  Think you already have all the pieces you need except for a QB?  That's when you'd want a Manning, Brady or Brees.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 18, 2011, 02:03:23 PM
gentlemen's wager

That's asking a lot........  :awesome_for_real:

Fair enough.  Bragging rights it is.  Now watch Vick blow out his ACL in the first game. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 18, 2011, 02:19:17 PM
Pryor eligible for supplemental draft, but must serve suspension (http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/football/nfl/08/18/terrelle.pryor.supplemental.draft.ap/index.html)

Any thoughts? I am a bit torn. I can understand the 5 game suspension, but what about all the shit these other kids have done in college ball and just jumped ship and went to the pros? All the sudden Pryor gets stung? Then again, he was set to go back to school and then dropped it when the road crumbled out from under him. I dunno... I doubt I'd be ok if he was just allowed to be drafted and play without any penalty at all...

Of course this is all a moot point considering he would not actually be playing this year anyway... meh.

Apologies for double post, but WTC? That makes exactly zero sense. NCAA and NFL are in no way affiliated. Goodell is a fucking lawful good retard. NFLPA should have a field day with that.

Yeah, that's retarded. So if Pryor gets suspended for the shit he pulled in college, does that mean Vince Willfolk and all the other U of Miami alums are going to be suspended for all the shit he got from that asshole in the University of Miami case? Because while Pryor's is bad enough the Miami shit takes the cake.

EDIT: Also, why would you take Freeman or Ryan over Rodgers? Rodgers has already won a Super Bowl and is only a year or two older than those two.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 18, 2011, 02:24:58 PM
I think the Pryor issue was more because he deliberately hired an agent to get suspended, i.e. he hired an agent to get suspended to specifically get draftable.  I think it's a legitimate reason to suspend him for 5 games.  He's manipulating the system to get an advantage that others might not get. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on August 18, 2011, 02:31:25 PM
Who's going to play him this year anyhow? No one's that desperate. Moot point.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on August 18, 2011, 02:39:25 PM
I think the Pryor issue was more because he deliberately hired an agent to get suspended, i.e. he hired an agent to get suspended to specifically get draftable.  I think it's a legitimate reason to suspend him for 5 games.  He's manipulating the system to get an advantage that others might not get. 

Regardless, he was technically still in college - and what advantage is he going to actually get? Couple extra practice squad paychecks?  :why_so_serious:  I get what you are saying but I mean, Reggie Bush single-handedly fucked an entire program AND had to give back the Heisman.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on August 18, 2011, 03:48:38 PM
EDIT: Also, why would you take Freeman or Ryan over Rodgers? Rodgers has already won a Super Bowl and is only a year or two older than those two.

Because everyone under-rates how good Rodgers really is because he replaced Favre who is one of the best (if not the best) to ever play, and he was fun to watch when he played to boot?

Which reminds me, I might need to get the basic 12 channel cable just so I can watch football this fall now that I have a TV :/



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 18, 2011, 04:52:16 PM
I'm kinda surprised so many of you would take Manning over Brees. I wouldn't. Hell, did yall not watch the Super Bowl?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 18, 2011, 07:00:48 PM
Rodgers is really, really damned good.  I don't know if I wouldn't take him first out of everyone available right now. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 18, 2011, 07:05:42 PM
EDIT: Also, why would you take Freeman or Ryan over Rodgers? Rodgers has already won a Super Bowl and is only a year or two older than those two.

Because everyone under-rates how good Rodgers really is because he replaced Favre who is one of the best (if not the best) to ever play, and he was fun to watch when he played to boot?

It's funny for me, because when Rodgers was at Cal, I didn't once think to myself, "Man, this guy is going to be so good in the NFL." So I still have a hard time wrapping my brain around the fact that he is, in fact, so good in the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 18, 2011, 08:48:24 PM
I'm kinda surprised so many of you would take Manning over Brees. I wouldn't. Hell, did yall not watch the Super Bowl?

Peyton Manning? Yeah, I'd take him over Brees. The body of his work kind of speaks for itself. Plus, he's been able to carry a team, and if the broadcasters are to be believed, he's an O-coordinator out on the field. He's gotten them into the playoffs repeatedly with some really suspect receivers. While I don't think any of Brees wideouts are as good as Reggie Wayne on an individual level, I do think every one of them is better than Manning's current corps.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 18, 2011, 09:04:45 PM
I hope Manning the Greater winds up a coach instead of a stupid announcer once he's done playing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on August 19, 2011, 12:24:39 AM
Rodgers is really, really damned good.  I don't know if I wouldn't take him first out of everyone available right now. 

He'd be my guy if I was building a team.  He's a major success already now, and he still has a bunch of upside.  He's also cool as a fucking cucumber.  Is there any QB in the league more unflappable (less flappable?  that don't sound right) than Rodgers?  Not for my money.

He probably isn't my Fantasy QB, but that's a different story.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 19, 2011, 06:05:25 AM
I hope Manning the Greater winds up a coach instead of a stupid announcer once he's done playing.

Fuck yes.  He sounds like a goddamned hick.  I would rather not be subjected to that the rest of my life.  

Edit:  It's not looking good for the Eagles (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=310818023)....or my gambling.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 19, 2011, 07:36:14 AM
Edit:  It's not looking good for the Eagles (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/recap?gameId=310818023)....or my gambling.   :awesome_for_real:

Vick stats  5/12   47   3.9   0   3   13.5               

The 0 TD, 3 INT part is what I'd be concerned about against a preseason level of preparation.  I think Vick is a remarkable athlete.  I just don't think he has the savvy or patience to beat the better teams in the league, especially in the big games.  Vick is just too inconsistent against teams able to contain his running game. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 19, 2011, 07:41:55 AM
I've already picked my horse (or my dawg :grin:) so I guess I'll ride it to the end-  he'll get better.  He's still shaking off the rust. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 19, 2011, 07:43:28 AM
I've already picked my horse (or my dawg :grin:) so I guess I'll ride it to the end-  he'll get better.  He's still shaking off the rust. 

I'll let you back out.  It's still early.  I do think that most of the Vegas books agree with you about Phili being one of the elite teams with a solid shot at the Super Bowl. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on August 19, 2011, 07:45:40 AM
Interesting to note these people around here coming off last week's debacle against the Redskins laughing that off as "it's preseason, no one gives a crap." Today, everyone is talking shit about how they destroyed the Eagles and Vick. The whole town needs to be put on seroquel asap.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 19, 2011, 07:49:21 AM
I know that it's still preseason, but Brady looked pretty impressive against TB.  Maybe he can bring back the Chad Johnson of old.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 19, 2011, 08:00:22 AM
I think Tom Brady is one of the top 2-3 quarterbacks to ever play the game.  He's simply amazing.  Last year was ridiculous. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on August 19, 2011, 10:21:31 AM
I'm kinda surprised so many of you would take Manning over Brees. I wouldn't. Hell, did yall not watch the Super Bowl?

Peyton Manning? Yeah, I'd take him over Brees. The body of his work kind of speaks for itself. Plus, he's been able to carry a team, and if the broadcasters are to be believed, he's an O-coordinator out on the field. He's gotten them into the playoffs repeatedly with some really suspect receivers. While I don't think any of Brees wideouts are as good as Reggie Wayne on an individual level, I do think every one of them is better than Manning's current corps.

His "body of work" is the past and he's on a downward arc now. Especially if he does not have a solid supporting cast. There are at least a half-dozen QB I'd rather have starting for me than P. Manning now (and I used to scoff him up in FF drafts every year) -- Brees, Rodgers, Roethlisberger (yes, Big Ben, check Manning v. Ben stats for last 3 years, see how Ben has him beat, then factor in how Manning plays half his games in a dome and many of other scattered in southern warm weather locales via division play whereas Steelers play outside in inclement weather for 3-4 games outside of Heinz field), Brady (who still is solid), etc..... In fact, I think I'd take Matt Ryan over Peyton Manning right now.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on August 19, 2011, 10:22:21 AM
Interesting to note these people around here coming off last week's debacle against the Redskins laughing that off as "it's preseason, no one gives a crap." Today, everyone is talking shit about how they destroyed the Eagles and Vick. The whole town needs to be put on seroquel asap.  :why_so_serious:

What else do they have to talk about right now?  :roflcopter:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on August 19, 2011, 10:30:55 AM
Interesting to note these people around here coming off last week's debacle against the Redskins laughing that off as "it's preseason, no one gives a crap." Today, everyone is talking shit about how they destroyed the Eagles and Vick. The whole town needs to be put on seroquel asap.  :why_so_serious:

What else do they have to talk about right now?  :roflcopter:

Absolutely nothing now, power went out about two hours ago from a storm and everyone is now being "social." Of course, I just went home...

Browns are on tonight... here's hoping the McCoy show continues.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on August 19, 2011, 11:45:13 AM
yes, Big Ben, check Manning v. Ben stats for last 3 years, see how Ben has him beat

Let's!

Code:
Year	Team	G	GS	PaYd	Comp	Att	C%	Plays	NetYd	NY/P	TD	Int	DYAR	Rk	YAR	Rk	DVOA	Rk	VOA	Rk
2010 PIT 12 12 3200 240 389 61.7% 417 3061 7.34 17 5 1238 7 1187 7 38.2% 2 36.2% 3
2009 PIT 15 15 4328 337 506 66.6% 563 4103 7.29 28 14 1390 8 1459 9 27.8% 8 29.7% 7
2008 PIT 16 16 3301 281 469 59.9% 518 3110 6.00 17 15 288 23 228 25 -2.2% 27 -4.1% 29

Code:
Year	Team	G	GS	PaYd	Comp	Att	C%	Plays	NetYd	NY/P	TD	Int	DYAR	Rk	YAR	Rk	DVOA	Rk	VOA	Rk
2010 IND 16 16 4700 450 679 66.3% 704 4747 6.74 33 17 1679 2 1880 2 25.0% 6 29.4% 5
2009 IND 16 16 4500 393 571 68.8% 591 4640 7.85 33 16 1936 2 2017 1 38.2% 5 40.3% 4
2008 IND 16 16 4002 371 555 66.8% 572 3967 6.94 27 12 1783 2 1780 2 36.1% 1 36.0% 2

Roethlisberger only had a better season than Manning last year if you prorate away his suspension, which is like prorating Micheal Vick into not a massive injury risk.  2009 is only close if you're looking at raw counting stats instead of adjusting for their schedules.  And 2008... well, that's a blow out.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 19, 2011, 12:00:39 PM
Yeah, Manning's numbers are just better, period. More TD's, better accuracy, more yards (albeit in a passing offense with a shit running game).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on August 19, 2011, 12:54:20 PM
Ben is an incredible quarterback when shit falls apart though. Favre-esc in a way.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 19, 2011, 12:59:00 PM
Ben is an incredible quarterback when shit falls apart though. Favre-esc in a way.

But he is a smug rape-y douchebag and needs to choke to death on his own blood.


No, not bitter about XL at all. Why do you ask?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Stewie on August 19, 2011, 02:08:17 PM
Quote
I think Tom Brady is one of the top 2-3 quarterbacks to ever play the game.  He's simply amazing.  Last year was ridiculous. 
As a Dolphins fan I f'n despise Brady, yet I have to pretty much agree with this statement. Its his poise and ability to always find  the open guy and put the ball right where it needs to be. I am in awe of him pretty regularly.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on August 19, 2011, 02:18:37 PM
Roethlisberger only had a better season than Manning last year if you prorate away his suspension, which is like prorating Micheal Vick into not a massive injury risk.  2009 is only close if you're looking at raw counting stats instead of adjusting for their schedules.  And 2008... well, that's a blow out.

Eh, passing yards and completion % mean jack squat taken out of context:

Let's look at passer rating which takes 4 major stat cat (TD, int, YPA, C%)

08 - PM(95.0) v. BR(80.1)
09 - PM(99.9) v. BR(100.5)
10 - PM(91.9) v. BR(97.0)

Manning only surpasses Ben in '08, the year Ben wins a super bowl with game winning TD pass.

Passing YPA, which measures effectiveness better than any other stat

08 - PM (7.2) v. BR (7.0)
09 - PM (7.8) v. BR (8.5)
10 - PM (6.9) v. BR (8.2)

Again, Manning only barely nips Ben in '08, but who had the better post-season?

But here's another category not factored into passing, but very relevant to offense and drives:

Since 2004:
Ben Roethlisberger has rushed for 874 yards and 14 touchdowns.
Peyton Manning has rushed for 140 yards and 8 touchdowns.

And again, Roethlisberger plays at least 3/4 of his game in Pittsburgh or outside cold weather venues with wind, rain, snow, etc... whilst Manning plays 3/4 of his games under a dome or in more climate friendly southern (AFC South) locales…

Bringing Ben's off-season hijinks into the discussion really doesn't add to the comparison…

More stats here.
http://coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_3781_James_Harrison_doesn%27t_know_how_lucky_he_is.html



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on August 19, 2011, 02:24:35 PM
Counterpoint would be the new metric (in the style of derived baseball metrics like WAR or EqA) ESPN came up with; Big Ben does not really come close to stacking up.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6834507/nfl-peyton-manning-top-two-qbr-seasons


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on August 19, 2011, 02:30:48 PM
Counterpoint would be the new metric (in the style of derived baseball metrics like WAR or EqA) ESPN came up with; Big Ben does not really come close to stacking up.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6834507/nfl-peyton-manning-top-two-qbr-seasons

A few weeks back, heard the dudes that came up with this formula explain and justify (I believe on ESPN radio) -- I not so sure about it, Ben gets penalized for sacks, and I don't they give enough merit to big pass plays -- odd thing was they set out to "equalize" the ratings system in lieu of "dink & dunk" type passing in vogue today, but the system seems to reward even more those "dink & dunk" passers. But I like that it penalizes fumbles -- not so sure on sacks -- having a big QB who fends off rushers and make plays downfield, means also less money needed to splurge for beefy studly O-linemen to protect someone more fragile like Manning.

And again, those numbers don't handicap for QB who play in inclement weather 2-3X as much like Manning and Brees…


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 20, 2011, 08:04:30 AM
Ben has the luxury of knowing that he can fuck up and his defense will bail him out.  That has to help a great deal in maintaining composure. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: SnakeCharmer on August 20, 2011, 08:13:10 AM
Unless you're playing fantasy leagues, the only state that matters is championships.  The rest is fluff.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 20, 2011, 08:35:25 AM
Unless you're playing fantasy leagues, the only state that matters is championships.  The rest is fluff.

Well, Fran Tarkenton is in the Hall of Fame.  It is possible to rate QB quality without mention of championships.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 22, 2011, 08:31:59 AM
Tarvaris Jackson update:
Still terrible.
 :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 22, 2011, 08:40:44 AM
Tarvaris Jackson update:
Still terrible.
 :oh_i_see:

Tony Romo update:
Still can only throw to Witten.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on August 22, 2011, 08:58:41 AM
Cincinnati Bengals Announcers: Still making excuses about "trying to gel with this new lineup."

Then again they have 20 years practice.

God I wish they'd leave this city so I could watch something else.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 22, 2011, 09:00:56 AM
Cincinnati Bengals Announcers: Still making excuses about "trying to gel with this new lineup."

Then again they have 20 years practice.

God I wish they'd leave this city so I could watch something else.

Just wait. You are about to draft Pryor.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on August 22, 2011, 09:33:54 AM
Tarvaris Jackson update:
Still terrible.
 :oh_i_see:

Whitehurst looked good on that 9 of 10 drive! Yea, it was against preseason scrubs, but hey, I'm trying to be positive for you.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 22, 2011, 09:38:23 AM
Tarvaris Jackson update:
Still terrible.
 :oh_i_see:

Whitehurst looked good on that 9 of 10 drive! Yea, it was against preseason scrubs, but hey, I'm trying to be positive for you.

He did indeed. They changed the gameplan for him though- they had TJ doing naked boots and all kinds of downfield throws to test him out, while Clipboard Jesus had more quick routes and first/2nd reads to go to. I want to see him get a run with the first team so we can more properly prepare.

Actually I just want to go 1-15, see Pete Carroll get fired, and then draft Andrew Luck.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on August 22, 2011, 11:28:15 AM
Cincinnati Bengals Announcers: Still making excuses about "trying to gel with this new lineup."

Then again they have 20 years practice.

God I wish they'd leave this city so I could watch something else.

Just wait. You are about to draft Pryor.  :awesome_for_real:

Nope!  Al Davis struck again!   :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 22, 2011, 11:36:03 AM
Oakland and Cincy. Battling it out for who is the worst ownership in the league.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on August 22, 2011, 12:09:18 PM
I can think of at least 7 guys I would rather have than Brees in the league right now:

1.  Rivers
2.  Brady
3.  Vick
4.  Rodgers
5.  Roethlisberger
6.  Manning son #1
7.  Ryan

And probably Joe Flacco and Josh Freeman as well. 

Were I the owner of an NFL team, I'd want:

1) Manning
2) Rogers
3) Brady
4) Brees

Vick is a meltdown waiting to happen.  Roethlessberger is too system specific.  I'm not sold on Ryan yet. 

I agree with this opinion 100%, was actually going to almost write the same exact thing!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 22, 2011, 12:11:56 PM
I agree with this opinion 100%, was actually going to almost write the same exact thing!

Holy crap! Did we just agree on something?  This may be a first. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on August 22, 2011, 12:12:55 PM
Cincinnati Bengals Announcers: Still making excuses about "trying to gel with this new lineup."

Then again they have 20 years practice.

God I wish they'd leave this city so I could watch something else.

Just wait. You are about to draft Pryor.  :awesome_for_real:

Nope, Pryor to Oakland.  Which seems totally unsurprising the more I think about it. :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on August 22, 2011, 12:14:41 PM
Just for shits and giggles, here are my predictions:

AFC East: Patriots
AFC North: Steelers
AFC South: Colts
AFC West: Chiefs
Wildcards: Texans, Chargers

NFC East: Cowboys
NFC North: Lions
NFC South: Bucs
NFC West: Rams
Wildcards: Packers, Giants

AFC Champ: Chiefs v Chargers
NFC Champ: Packers v Cowboys

Superbowl: Packers v Chargers - Packers repeat!

---

Yeah I wrote Lions!  Suh is going to rip Rogers head off... literally.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 22, 2011, 12:40:27 PM
Oakland and Cincy. Battling it out for who is the worst ownership in the league.

Can't we just shoot both the owners, shove their bodies up Jerry Jones' ass and shot the trio into the sun?

EDIT: According to ESPN, the Raiders now do not have a pick in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th rounds of next year's draft. WTF? Does anyone think they are close enough to a winning team that they should miss out on that many high picks? Al Davis is certifiable.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 22, 2011, 12:52:58 PM
Davis got confused. He thought he was recruiting for a track team, not a football team.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on August 22, 2011, 01:27:32 PM
Just for shits and giggles, here are my predictions:

AFC East: Patriots
AFC North: Steelers
AFC South: Colts
AFC West: Chiefs
Wildcards: Texans, Chargers

NFC East: Cowboys
NFC North: Lions
NFC South: Bucs
NFC West: Rams
Wildcards: Packers, Giants

AFC Champ: Chiefs v Chargers
NFC Champ: Packers v Cowboys

Superbowl: Packers v Chargers - Packers repeat!

---

Yeah I wrote Lions!  Suh is going to rip Rogers head off... literally.


Dude, I'm a Lion's fan and I think you are nuts.

There will be lots of injuries like every year. Hell, we already lost an RB for the year. That's just a taste.  7-9 is my predicition.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on August 22, 2011, 01:31:56 PM
What's the over/under on how many games before Stafford's arm launches itself out of his shoulder socket?  I'll take 9.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 22, 2011, 01:33:02 PM
What's the over/under on how many games before Stafford's arm launches itself out of his shoulder socket?  I'll take 9.

Game 5. Chicago defense.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 22, 2011, 02:03:02 PM
Dude, I'm a Lion's fan


Wait......what?  How?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on August 22, 2011, 02:46:03 PM
Dude, I'm a Lion's fan


Wait......what?  How?

Drank the water... Same explanation I use to certify my being a Browns fan


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on August 22, 2011, 03:19:44 PM
Lions fan here too, 7-9 sounds about right.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on August 23, 2011, 09:30:48 AM
Well, the Giants looked a bit more decent last night.  Too bad Thomas tore his ACL. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 23, 2011, 01:42:03 PM
I wonder if the Seahawks can weasel a pick or two out of them for Kelly Jennings. I would trade him for a scorching case of herpes, so actual tangible gain would be even better.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on August 23, 2011, 01:56:14 PM
Well, the Giants looked a bit more decent last night.  Too bad Thomas tore his ACL. 

Witherspoon tore his too.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on August 23, 2011, 11:21:32 PM
I think the NFC North may be the hardest division to pick this year.

The Lions seem like they'll be pretty good, if they can stay healthy.
The Bears had the NFC's best record last year (not entirely deservedly, but still).
The Vikings Favred themselves up last year, but do we really think they were that bad?  I don't.
The Packers are still the Packers, and Aaron Rodgers is The Man.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 24, 2011, 04:57:26 AM
I think the NFC North may be the hardest division to pick this year.

The Lions seem like they'll be pretty good, if they can stay healthy.
The Bears had the NFC's best record last year (not entirely deservedly, but still).
The Vikings Favred themselves up last year, but do we really think they were that bad?  I don't.
The Packers are still the Packers, and Aaron Rodgers is The Man.



Maybe 2-4, but I suspect it will go Packers, Vikings, Lions, Bears.  The Bears look terrible. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 24, 2011, 06:16:01 AM
I think the NFC North may be the hardest division to pick this year.

The Lions seem like they'll be pretty good, if they can stay healthy.
The Bears had the NFC's best record last year (not entirely deservedly, but still).
The Vikings Favred themselves up last year, but do we really think they were that bad?  I don't.
The Packers are still the Packers, and Aaron Rodgers is The Man.

How is that the hard division? Lions, Bears, and Vikings all have serious question marks at the QB spot. Pick the team with the best QB and a passable if not great Defense. That's your division champion 9/10 times. It's Packers all the way.

The hardest division to pick in my view is the NFC West. Absolutely nobody knows who will stop being shitty long enough to win.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on August 24, 2011, 06:19:18 AM
Packers, Bears, Lions, Vikings. Bears edge out the Lions by a game maybe.

Cutler will be better this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 24, 2011, 06:59:48 AM
Cutler will be better this year.

Cutler has the physical potential to be better, I just don't think he sees the game well enough to make it happen.  I like the Vikings with McNabb and a healthy Percy Harvin, but their lack of depth at receiver will kill them.  They should have kept Rice.  I see this division as Green Bay and 3 other teams struggling to be 9-7, 8-8, or 7-9.  Which team (MIN, DET, CHI) will have which record is anyone's guess.  If Harvin's headaches keep him off the field, Minnesota will struggle to be 7-9. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 24, 2011, 07:00:47 AM
I agree, I have a hard time figuring out the North could be relevant this year outside of the Packers.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 24, 2011, 07:03:22 AM
I think this is the year that the Bears get trampled. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 24, 2011, 07:17:47 AM
I contend that the most watched/interesting division this year will be the NFC South.

You have the Saints and Drew Brees, you have the Falcons coming off a 13-3 season, you have the Panthers who drafted Cam Newton, and Tampa who won double digit games last year but missed the playoffs.

Downside for the Bucs is that they have no QB, so they will try to ride their D as far as they can.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 24, 2011, 07:29:42 AM
The hardest division to pick in my view is the NFC West. Absolutely nobody knows who will stop being shitty long enough to win.

Rams imo!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on August 24, 2011, 08:17:41 AM
Downside for the Bucs is that they have no QB, so they will try to ride their D as far as they can.

Quick, which QB in 2010 had the following stats: 3451 passing yards, 364 rushing yards, 25 TDs to only 6 INTs and a 95.9 passer rating (6th among starting QBs).

Hint: he plays for the team that 'has no QB'.  :roll:

The Bucs are likely to regress a bit this year due to a tougher schedule, but QB is not a problem area for that team.  Inexperience, especially on defense (six of the starting front seven are 24 or younger, including three rookies) will be the team's biggest problem.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 24, 2011, 08:52:55 AM
Quick, which QB in 2010 had the following stats: 3451 passing yards, 364 rushing yards, 25 TDs to only 6 INTs and a 95.9 passer rating (6th among starting QBs).

Hint: he plays for the team that 'has no QB'.  :roll:

See here's the problem I have with the overall stats argument. You left out the when and the how. Please allow me to fill in the gaps.

He cleared a 100 QB rating seven times. Those games were against Carolina, Arizona, Carolina, SF, Washington, Seattle, and New Orleans. You can toss out the NO game because they had already clinched a playoff spot and didn't care in the last game of the season. What do the rest of those teams have in common? All of them were under 500, and Carolina was the worst team in the league. How did he fare against teams with good records? Pitt? Crushed - 67.1 rating with a pick. New Orleans when they cared? Smackdown - They got a garbage TD in the 4th after getting shutout for 3 quarters. Atlanta? Uneven, 2 TDs, 2 picks, a 72 rating and a tight loss, then another loss and a 61.4 rating in the other game. Baltimore, same story. In fact, he played like ass against any team that had a playoff shot and lost.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 24, 2011, 08:54:54 AM
Wait, what?

Ok, the NFC North is not really that hard to figure out. The Lions are a year away from real contention. They'll start strong and fade once Matt Stafford's shoulder goes out again. They will improve, but they still don't have the defense and running game to be considered a contender. The Vikings are a goddamn trainwreck, and it was more than Favre that caused it. Their receiver corps needs a really good QB to make them good and McNabb isn't that good anymore. Oh and he will get injured - a lot. Did you see all those hits Favre took last year? McNabb is going to take most if not all of those same hits. Their defense is aging. No Sidney Rice means they don't have a reliable #1 receiver, because Harvin's headaches and his performances without Rice proved that he isn't a #1. The Bears ARE goddamn terrible but will win at least 3 or 4 extra games on Mike Martz's crazy stupid offensive schemes and sheer defensive power. But fuck me, Cutler will continue to take bad hits because Martz can't protect a QB with a GOOD O Line and the Bears O Line is nothing like a good one. And Cutler has lost Olson, so his one release valve which was terribly misused by Martz is now gone. The Packers lost some people but I see nothing that leads me to believe they won't win that division by 1 or more games.

Now the Bucs in the NFC South? You're crazy if you think they have no QB. Freeman put up good numbers with NOBODIES. That team is young, hungry and talented but raw. They will probably win 10 games again because of a tougher schedule, but I don't see them taking a step back unless the Panthers are better - which they won't be. Cam Newton, for all the hype, is still on a team with 1-15 talent and a pissed off #1 receiver in Steve Smith. They might win 3 games no matter who is at QB, 4 or 5 if Newton is the real deal. But this team is 2 years from contender status. Both Atlanta and New Orleans got better IMO. New Orleans got deeper at key positions (Darren Sproles as a replacement for Reggie Bush was goddamn brilliant). Atlanta is just a good damn regular season team - it's the playoffs where they have to prove themselves.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 24, 2011, 09:01:13 AM
Freeman is a 23 year old lump of clay. He might be good, he might go into a tailspin. I'm not convinced he has the goods. If you believe the Bucs win 10 games, you could make a mint in Vegas because their O/U is 8.

The Bucs are taking a step back this year, but they will be in the mix in the early season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 24, 2011, 09:10:56 AM
How can the Lions ever be a contender with Stafford's trick shoulder?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on August 24, 2011, 09:16:25 AM
Freeman is a 23 year old lump of clay. He might be good, he might go into a tailspin. I'm not convinced he has the goods.

The claim isn't that Freeman is an elite, stud QB (at least not yet).  It's that the Bucs are not in a situation where 'they have no QB'.  Freeman put up good numbers on a team that had no running game until the end of the year, and their best (and only decent) receiver was a rookie.  The most telling number on that stat line is the 6 INTs.  That tells me he takes care of the football and makes good decisions, which right there puts him ahead of the majority of the QBs in the league.  The Bucs got crushed by good teams?  Well no shit.  Put Eli Manning on last year's Bucs team and Freeman on the Giants and see how well each one does.  Freeman would be an instant upgrade at the QB position on at least 50% of NFL teams today.

Unless you're setting the bar at Brady/Rogers/Philips level, where everything under that indicates a team has 'no QB'.  Which would make you a lunatic.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on August 24, 2011, 10:06:34 AM
Comparing every starting QB to a hip-hop star (http://bleacherreport.com/articles/818582-comparing-all-32-starting-nfl-quarterbacks-to-hip-hop-artists)  :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 24, 2011, 10:59:14 AM
YES, Kerry Collins got signed with the COLTS, he can continue to be my object of irrational hate!

He knew I'd miss him in my own fucked up way.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on August 24, 2011, 11:34:57 AM
YES, Kerry Collins got signed with the COLTS, he can continue to be my object of irrational hate!

He knew I'd miss him in my own fucked up way.  :why_so_serious:

I expect every person in Indianapolis is now running to the nearest church and praying for Peyton.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 24, 2011, 12:43:43 PM
He's such a fucker, too, if Manning the Greater got hurt, Kerry Collins would have an awesome first game starting for them. To give them Hope. Because then it would be all the sweeter to crush their souls later.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 24, 2011, 05:54:14 PM
Manning the greater isn't going to start week one by most estimates.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 24, 2011, 07:18:16 PM
Hmm, if he'll only miss one week, what Collins will do to maximize angst is hard to call. He can't be so awesome to cause doubt in the hearts of Colts fans, so perhaps instead he will be so wretched the fans will live in mortal fear of Manning ever getting hurt again ever.

I MISSED YOU, KERRY COLLINS  :why_so_serious:


Fun Fact: One year, when he was still playing for the Giants, he managed to fuck up in such a way that pissed me off so bad, I picked him up on my fantasy football team specifically to sit him on my bench. I lost that game, and noticed he put up some really good fantasy numbers while sitting there (Favre was my starter that year and had a bad game, I believe). So I decided, "fuck it, I'll start him next week, the Giants are playing someone bad anyway." Oh! Poor, fool me. He naturally completely stunk, and I would've won if I had started ANYone but him. Still not realizing he was a fantasy locker room cancer, I put him back on my bench so he could THINK ABOUT WHAT HE HAD DONE.

Long story short (too late) I lost four or five games in a row while he was on my team. I finally cut him, but it was too late. Even though I won my games without him, his horrible mojo cost me a playoff spot.  Yeah, it was totally him, not me!  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 25, 2011, 07:34:26 AM
Losing Manning wouldn't be quite such a big deal if the Colts had ANY sort of running game or defense. As it is, he's the only one that can make that team win consistently, even with scrubs at wideout.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 25, 2011, 07:39:24 AM
They will lose to Houston with no Manning. That being said, they did that anyway last year and it didn't matter at all.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 25, 2011, 08:04:20 AM
A lot of it will depend on how much better that division is. I think Houston will be better than last year as Wade Phillips might actually whip that defense into shape. Tennessee is a mystery but likely to be worse - Hasselbeck at QB (sure to miss a few games with injury), new coach, no (or a very pissed off) Chris Johnson, lots of really unsettled things on that team. The Jags probably haven't improved either. Yeah, it probably won't make any difference at all, as the Colts are likely to win the division anyway unless he misses the whole damn season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on August 25, 2011, 11:01:29 AM
YES, Kerry Collins got signed with the COLTS, he can continue to be my object of irrational hate!

He knew I'd miss him in my own fucked up way.  :why_so_serious:

I'll always have a soft spot for Kerry because he took the Giants to the Superbowl in 2000 after trouncing the Vikings 42--0 in the NFC Championship Game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 25, 2011, 02:16:43 PM
But he was terrible in the actual Superbowl, plus I will always be mad that he didn't break the record for "most consecutive games with two fumbles or more" while with the Giants. Bitch couldn't even do THAT right.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on August 26, 2011, 10:16:11 AM
And who says that a rotating patched together O-Line isn't fun?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tg0YVa-9HW0


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 26, 2011, 12:28:34 PM
I'm continually unimpressed by Romo's ability to throw to anybody but Witten.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on August 26, 2011, 12:50:25 PM
Unless you have Witten on your fantasy team, which makes it very impressive indeed.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 28, 2011, 08:25:34 PM
God I can't wait for Pete Carroll to get fired.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 28, 2011, 09:45:26 PM
God I can't wait for Pete Carroll to get fired.

What is it that you don't like about Carroll?  I happen to think that he's an excellent coach.  He just hasn't got much to work with. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 29, 2011, 07:28:43 AM
God I can't wait for Pete Carroll to get fired.

What is it that you don't like about Carroll?  I happen to think that he's an excellent coach.  He just hasn't got much to work with. 

Not WAP, but I disagree about Carroll's coaching.  He had a shitton of talent at USC and, except in a few years underperformed-  particularly on defense.  He had some really good coaches at his coordinator positions in his early years at USC which masked some of the deficiencies that I saw at the end of his tenure.  Regardless, he was always head and shoulders above his competition when it came to talent.  He won't have that advantage in the NFL.  In fact, at Seattle it will be quite the opposite.  I expect him to do mediocre at best. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on August 29, 2011, 07:31:17 AM
Talent isn't always the coaches fault (cheap owner for example).  Choice of assistants is also often dictated by the owner. 

It would be interesting to know how much of a role Carroll has in recruiting, drafting, and free agent acquisition.  Those things would really speak to his ability to succeed at the professional level.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 29, 2011, 07:37:53 AM
Well, that's really the point.  He had complete control over his troops at USC.  At Seattle he won't, and not even necessarily because the owner is cheap.  The playing field is more level in the NFL (both in coaches and in players).  It is a rare coach that can consistently get his teams playing far above the talent level.  I don't think Carroll is that guy.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 29, 2011, 08:11:10 AM
He isn't. He's never proved in any of the other opportunities he's had as head coach that he can COACH a team to victory. He's the kind of coach who can with with really good talent, but putting all that talent together at the NFL level is really really hard, especially a place like Seattle.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 29, 2011, 08:44:22 AM
With the talent gap that Carroll had at USC I could probably put together a top 10 team.  When you're operating with a talent gap like that the scheme becomes much less important. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on August 29, 2011, 08:49:47 AM
With the talent gap that Carroll had at USC I could probably put together a top 10 team.  When you're operating with a talent gap like that the scheme becomes much less important. 

Hell of a recruiter though...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 29, 2011, 09:29:31 AM
Oh fuck yeah.  And I don't think USC was nearly as dirty as the pictures that were painted.  In face, they were small potatoes compared to what was going on at Miami. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 29, 2011, 11:39:21 AM
With the talent gap that Carroll had at USC I could probably put together a top 10 team.  When you're operating with a talent gap like that the scheme becomes much less important. 

Hell of a recruiter though...

That is precisely what I loathe about him. He is less of a coach and more of a salesman. He is oily and disingenuous. I just wish I could watch him fail miserably somewhere else instead of here  :heartbreak:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 29, 2011, 11:44:06 AM
I don't think you will get what you want.

However, the division is Arizona's to lose imo.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on August 29, 2011, 11:44:56 AM
Carroll is a great Defensive Coordinator.

He is not a great head coach.

Kind of like Buddy Ryan, Wade Phillips, Guenther Cunnigham, and Ray Rhodes. Guys that just about anyone would hire to coach a defense but who were mediocre to downright terrible as head coaches.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 29, 2011, 12:17:13 PM
Carroll is a great Defensive Coordinator.

He is not a great head coach.

Kind of like Buddy Ryan, Wade Phillips, Guenther Cunnigham, and Ray Rhodes. Guys that just about anyone would hire to coach a defense but who were mediocre to downright terrible as head coaches.

The problem with this theory is that his defenses have steadily gone downhill at USC, and the last two years he was coaching there USC could barely catch a cold in the fourth quarter.  And that is with the talent that he had accumulated. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on August 29, 2011, 02:55:47 PM
I don't think you will get what you want.

However, the division is Arizona's to lose imo.

I don't know about that. I'm not sure the addition of Kolb is the magic salve that team has been lacking. St. Louis is poised to take off, IMO, especially in a division with 2 games against San Fran and Seattle each.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 29, 2011, 03:06:39 PM
From what I have seen from St Louis so far in the preaseason (which is not more than a couple of series), they are still a ways away. Another good draft and free agency, coupled with some experience for all their young guys will make them a handful in 2012 and beyond.

That being said, it won't take much to win this division. If anything it is worse than last year. SF is a wreck, Seattle is a mess, Arizona is schizo and St Louis is REALLY young.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on August 29, 2011, 03:12:08 PM
That's why I think St. Louis will probably be the team to beat. They're young, but they aren't the other three teams in the NFC West.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on August 29, 2011, 03:16:39 PM
Carroll is a great Defensive Coordinator.

The problem with this theory is that his defenses have steadily gone downhill at USC, and the last two years he was coaching there USC could barely catch a cold in the fourth quarter.  And that is with the talent that he had accumulated. 

Being a great Coordinator does not mean that the Defense (or Offense, see Norv Turner as a shining example) will be worth a shit when you are head coach.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on August 29, 2011, 03:20:28 PM
Our D-line is starting to look decent. LBs and secondary are really young and/or terrible. Got decidedly less so when they shipped Kelly Jennings to the Bungles this morning. That POS deserves to rot there.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: gimpyone on August 29, 2011, 06:16:36 PM
From what I have seen from St Louis so far in the preaseason (which is not more than a couple of series), they are still a ways away. Another good draft and free agency, coupled with some experience for all their young guys will make them a handful in 2012 and beyond.

That being said, it won't take much to win this division. If anything it is worse than last year. SF is a wreck, Seattle is a mess, Arizona is schizo and St Louis is REALLY young.

I'm already looking forward to next season.  :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on August 29, 2011, 08:44:46 PM
Giants fans are glad that game didn't count. Yeesh.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on August 31, 2011, 03:58:17 AM
Our D-line is starting to look decent. LBs and secondary are really young and/or terrible. Got decidedly less so when they shipped Kelly Jennings to the Bungles this morning. That POS deserves to rot there.

Didn't they also just get rid of Lofa Tatupu?  I mean, he hasn't lived up to his promise IMO, but still.  Pete makes a lot of daring moves, and some of them even look good on paper.  Problem is, nobody gets to stay around long enough to begin forming a cohesive unit, and this problem is only getting worse.  Plus the fact that there is now absolutely nothing looking like a top tier QB, which is a near must in this league.  Why they attempted to land nobody better than Tavaris Jackson is a total mystery to me.  Not that I believe in Kevin Kolb, but even that would have been better.  Or McNabb.  Or Kyle Orton.  Or whatever the fuck Carson Palmer is up to these days.  Shit, even Tim Tebow might give me more reason for optimism.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on August 31, 2011, 06:03:27 AM
Being a great Coordinator does not mean that the Defense (or Offense, see Norv Turner as a shining example) will be worth a shit when you are head coach.

That's not the norm though.  Most of the time they do fine with their specialty. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Margalis on September 05, 2011, 12:06:38 PM
Being a good recruiter is almost completely irrelevant to the NFL game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 06, 2011, 08:52:55 AM
Being a good recruiter is almost completely irrelevant to the NFL game.

That's the whole point. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 06, 2011, 10:16:29 AM
Being a good recruiter is almost completely irrelevant to the NFL game.

That's the whole point. 

Yeah, coaches don't really recruit in the Pro's. Owners with big wallets do. Recruitment matters if there is a next step, if you can give them that, you can stream in top talent. The NFL IS the top talent.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on September 06, 2011, 10:26:42 PM
Well, he's reportedly a good motivator and gets players to buy-in.  Of course, that only lasts as long as you're able to win.  Despite all the poking fun at this team, I imagine they themselves have a fairly positive outlook...2010 with a new coach, a lot of new players, a division championship and a highly emotional playoff win against the defending champs.  That's the wave they are riding, not the 7-9 record.

Of course, maybe that all goes out the window when Tavaris Jackson is your starting QB.  I think their success or failure ultimately boils down to him and whether or not he "emerges".  And there is no reason to think that he will.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 07, 2011, 06:20:31 AM
Tavaris Jackson is your starting QB.

 :ye_gods:

I find it odd that they could have gotten Leinart.  Surely he's a better option than the three slugs they've got on the roster. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on September 07, 2011, 06:53:51 AM
Question for Wed: How many weeks until Ponder is starting for Minnesota?  I just don't think McNabb has it in him anymore.  As soon as they go 1-4 or 2-4, I'm betting he gets the hook. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 07, 2011, 06:54:40 AM
McNabb hasn't had it for years.  I'm not sure he ever had it, really, and that it was actually TO that had it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on September 07, 2011, 08:14:11 AM
McNabb hasn't had it for years.  I'm not sure he ever had it, really, and that it was actually TO that had it.

That is overly harsh.  McNabb had a flash for a while. Then the Eagles franchised him and he gave up.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 07, 2011, 08:16:48 AM
Is it?  He really only had one truly great year (http://www.nfl.com/player/donovanmcnabb/2502044/careerstats), 2004.  The rest of the time his QB rating was in the 70s and 80s, which is pretty mediocre. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 07, 2011, 08:46:33 AM
McNabb hasn't had it for years.  I'm not sure he ever had it, really, and that it was actually TO that had it.

You really need to rethink that. Before TO got there, he had NOBODY to throw to. NOBODY. I mean, Pinkston, Thrash, Lewis? These were his wideouts through most of those years. He had Brian Westbrook as his main weapon most of those years, and while Westbrook was really good, he was still a RB with 3 or 4 total lumps of meat as his wideouts. And he still got them to 3 straight NFC Championships before the Super Bowl year. He also never threw more INTs than TD's in any season prior to last year - and he was on a BAD team last year. McNabb has most certainly lost it, probably for good. But he has always been an underrated passer IMO. Shit, you put him on a team with better receivers like last year's Green Bay team, or with Moss/Welker like Brady had in '07 or even Harrison/Wayne on the Colts in 2006, and he would have shined. Hell, even with TO, he still didn't have a good 2nd wide receiver.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 07, 2011, 08:49:28 AM
He also threw into the dirt like he was running infield practice. I have never seen a QB throw more low uncatchable balls in my life. He was mediocre at best, and once his legs went he wasn't even that. Grossly overrated his whole career.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on September 07, 2011, 09:02:29 AM
Tavaris Jackson is your starting QB.

 :ye_gods:

I find it odd that they could have gotten Leinart.  Surely he's a better option than the three slugs they've got on the roster. 

Jacksonville is starting Luke McCown at QB.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 07, 2011, 09:04:20 AM
McNabb hasn't had it for years.  I'm not sure he ever had it, really, and that it was actually TO that had it.

You really need to rethink that. Before TO got there, he had NOBODY to throw to. NOBODY. I mean, Pinkston, Thrash, Lewis? These were his wideouts through most of those years. He had Brian Westbrook as his main weapon most of those years, and while Westbrook was really good, he was still a RB with 3 or 4 total lumps of meat as his wideouts. And he still got them to 3 straight NFC Championships before the Super Bowl year. He also never threw more INTs than TD's in any season prior to last year - and he was on a BAD team last year. McNabb has most certainly lost it, probably for good. But he has always been an underrated passer IMO. Shit, you put him on a team with better receivers like last year's Green Bay team, or with Moss/Welker like Brady had in '07 or even Harrison/Wayne on the Colts in 2006, and he would have shined. Hell, even with TO, he still didn't have a good 2nd wide receiver.

Coulda woulda shoulda.  I'm not buying it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 07, 2011, 09:04:35 AM

Jacksonville is starting Luke McCown at QB.


I give him 3 games before the rookie starts. Going to be a fun year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 07, 2011, 09:08:11 AM
I expect McNabb might make 6 games at most as starter. I really think his time as a starter is just about done. I think you guys hating on McNabb's past have been watching different games than I have. He was never elite, but he was pretty good. He was also real injury prone, but remember. The guy played one whole game with a broken leg.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 07, 2011, 09:10:41 AM
I expect McNabb might make 6 games at most as starter. I really think his time as a starter is just about done. I think you guys hating on McNabb's past have been watching different games than I have. He was never elite, but he was pretty good. He was also real injury prone, but remember. The guy played one whole game with a broken leg.

He was mediocre most of the time, had 3-4 good years, and one elite year.  That pretty much sums up his career.  Had he won the big game, like Roethlisberger, he might be remembered in a different light.  Winning the superbowl makes a big difference in the career achievement race.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 07, 2011, 09:53:46 AM
I expect McNabb might make 6 games at most as starter. I really think his time as a starter is just about done. I think you guys hating on McNabb's past have been watching different games than I have. He was never elite, but he was pretty good. He was also real injury prone, but remember. The guy played one whole game with a broken leg.

He was mediocre most of the time, had 3-4 good years, and one elite year.  That pretty much sums up his career.  Had he won the big game, like Roethlisberger, he might be remembered in a different light.  Winning the superbowl makes a big difference in the career achievement race.

Just ask Jim.  :uhrr: I'd like to think he would have his ring if he wouldn't have got stuck with Buffalo.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 07, 2011, 10:01:38 AM
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6939814/peyton-manning-indianapolis-colts-opener-sunday-bill-polian-says

Wow.. No Peyton. The streak is over... Favre lives on...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on September 07, 2011, 11:04:15 AM
I have Collie in another league.  Sitting him out...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on September 07, 2011, 01:24:03 PM
On McNabb, you are all nuts. He might be done for, something might have happened in Philly that permanently zapped his QB mojo or it might be just the performance distortion field that seems to afflict every 21st century Washington Redskin acquisition. We'll see soon enough as playing the Packers, Bears, and even Lions will put his aged frame to the test.

But McNabb for 2000's decade, has been a stellar performer, taking his team to 5 NFC championship games and 1 SB (which was a close game, but he was bested by a better Tom Brady). Yeah, you might say he "choked" in those games, but I'd be just as likely to center the crosshairs on Andy Reid, who's always struck me in the mold of Schottenheimer and Cowher as the biggest "choke" coaches in the history of professional football. Cowher got redemption in 2005, but he lost 4 AFC championship games (I believe all were in home turf in Pittsburgh) and '95 SB (though Neil O'Donnel certainly didn't help his cause there).

About the only knack is he gets hurt a lot, and I think, finally the run of injuries has just done him in for good.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on September 07, 2011, 01:29:46 PM
Tavaris Jackson is your starting QB.

 :ye_gods:

I find it odd that they could have gotten Leinart.  Surely he's a better option than the three slugs they've got on the roster.  

Leinart is awful. His career passer rating is like a 70 vs. Jackson's 86. He lost his starting job to Derek Anderson the year AFTER Anderson had that historically awful season in Cleveland. I'd be betting on Jackson over him for sure.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 07, 2011, 01:32:16 PM
Tavaris Jackson is your starting QB.

 :ye_gods:

I find it odd that they could have gotten Leinart.  Surely he's a better option than the three slugs they've got on the roster.  

Leinart is awful. His career passer rating is like a 70 vs. Jackson's 86. He lost his starting job to Derek Anderson the year AFTER Anderson had that historically awful season in Cleveland. I'd be betting on Jackson over him for sure.

That surprises me.  Leinart, if nothing else, has the talent to be a decent QB if he could stop partying.  Plus he's played for Petey before.  Maybe that would be the match made in Seattle. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on September 07, 2011, 02:33:26 PM
Introducing Grantland's Bad QB League (http://www.grantland.com/blog/the-triangle/post/_/id/3686/introducing-grantlands-bad-quarterback-league)

Quote
There is too much attention and praise showered on the modern elite quarterback. The Tom Bradys, Peyton Mannings and Aaron Rodgers of the league are celebrated as genius demigods, just because they can make split-second decisions and deliver precise passes while being chased by gigantic men who spent an entire week figuring out ways to injure them. Blah fucking blah. The more compelling narrative is that of the modern failure. Because when things go wrong for an NFL quarterback, they go spectacularly wrong. And there will be no shortage of that this season. On-field arguments. Botched handoffs. Locker room backstabbing. Seeing that unfold is way more fun than watching Brady sling the ball around for a bit, droneishly drop clichés at the press conference, then go home to the hottest woman on the planet.

This year, we're going to make it even more interesting, using an old trick: adding a draft, a scoring system, and gambling.

Start writing an e-mail to seven of your friends now, because you don't have much time to get going on your own Bad Quarterback League. The steps are simple:

1. Find eight people dumb enough to participate in a Bad Quarterback League.
2. Set the stakes.
3. Draft four NFL teams using a snake-style draft.
4. Each week, choose two teams to start (you can start a team no more than 13 times a season and no less than five times a season). Just so we're clear — you're drafting a team, and you get every quarterback on that team.
5. Check Grantland each week to get the scoring from the weekly scorecard.
6. Remember that every QB on your roster is eligible for 24/7 points. That means even if you didn't start the Seahawks on Sunday, you still get the 150 points when Tarvaris Jackson's penis appears on a blog on Tuesday.
The Scoring System

POSITIVE POINTS:

Benched during game (non-injury): 35 points
Concussed: 10 points
Interception for TD: 25 points
Interception (non-TD): 5 points
Fumbles lost: 5 points
Fumbles kept: 2 points
3-turnover game: 12 points
4-turnover game: 16 points
5-turnover game: 24 points
6-turnover game: 50 points
No passes of 25+ yards: 10 points
No passing/rushing TDs (QBs only): 10 points
Under 200 passing yards: 6 points
Under 150 passing yards: 12 points
Under 100 passing yards: 25 points
Under 50 percent completion rate: 5 points
Under 40 percent completion rate: 15 points
Under 30 percent completion rate: 25 points
Teammate/Coach/Fan argument on sidelines replayed replayed on SportsCenter: 15 points

24/7 POINTS:

Arrested: 50 points
Detained/questioned by police: 10 points
Practice/locker room fight (physical): 20 points
Apology press conference: 75 points
Penis picture on blog: 150 points
Official vote of confidence from coach: 10 points
Bitching about his linemen: 10 points
Suspended: 50 points per game

NEGATIVE POINTS:

300-349 yards passing: -6 points
350-399 yards passing: -9 points
400+ yards passing: -12 points
75+ yards rushing: -8 points
3 passing/rushing TDs: -5 points
4 passing/rushing TD’s: -10 points
5 passing/rushing TD’s: -20 points
Game-winning drive (last two minutes): -12 points


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on September 08, 2011, 08:53:25 AM
He also threw into the dirt like he was running infield practice. I have never seen a QB throw more low uncatchable balls in my life. He was mediocre at best, and once his legs went he wasn't even that. Grossly overrated his whole career.

6 Pro Bowls.  C'mon.  It is ok to hate good players, but that hate doesn't make good players bad players.  Does anyone believe McNabb won't be a Hall of Famer? 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 08, 2011, 09:12:37 AM
He also threw into the dirt like he was running infield practice. I have never seen a QB throw more low uncatchable balls in my life. He was mediocre at best, and once his legs went he wasn't even that. Grossly overrated his whole career.

6 Pro Bowls.  C'mon.  It is ok to hate good players, but that hate doesn't make good players bad players.  Does anyone believe McNabb won't be a Hall of Famer? 

I don't believe he's a Hall of Famer. He's got no Super Bowl wins, and he's got less yards and less TDs than Boomer Esiason who isn't in there. Hell, why not put in Jim Everett? He's got similar numbers.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 08, 2011, 09:26:42 AM
McNabb has a career QB rating of 85.7 and no Superbowl ring.  That's about like Boomer.  It's also a lot like Farve, yet Farve has the ring.  Without a ring Favre doesn't look nearly as good, in my opinion.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on September 08, 2011, 09:28:29 AM
He also threw into the dirt like he was running infield practice. I have never seen a QB throw more low uncatchable balls in my life. He was mediocre at best, and once his legs went he wasn't even that. Grossly overrated his whole career.

6 Pro Bowls.  C'mon.  It is ok to hate good players, but that hate doesn't make good players bad players.  Does anyone believe McNabb won't be a Hall of Famer? 

He won't be.  Pro Bowls are meaningless.  He's had 2 really good statistical seasons and no Super Bowl wins.  He's a below 60% career passer. 

I suppose he compares statistically with another hall of famer, Jim Kelly, except that Kelly went to 4 Super Bowls to McNabb's 1.  Of course, another person he compares to is Rich Gannon.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on September 08, 2011, 09:31:02 AM
McNabb has a career QB rating of 85.7 and no Superbowl ring.  That's about like Boomer.  It's also a lot like Farve, yet Farve has the ring.  Without a ring Favre doesn't look nearly as good, in my opinion.

He'd be just another Dan Marino.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 08, 2011, 09:32:15 AM
I'm not a fan of Marino.  He was the antithesis of a winner.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on September 08, 2011, 09:36:00 AM
Well, there's a place for guys that just blew up statistically or were able to keep up a high level of play for a long time like a Cal Ripken (different sport, same argument) or Brett Favre.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 08, 2011, 09:42:41 AM
Sure there is.  Marino was the highest statistically productive passer of all time for a while and merits discussion in the all time greats.  He was on shitty teams a good deal of the time.  I just don't have much interest in losers and a guy of his talent level should have been able to bring home some trophy.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on September 08, 2011, 09:53:34 AM
Sure there is.  Marino was the highest statistically productive passer of all time for a while and merits discussion in the all time greats.  He was on shitty teams a good deal of the time.  I just don't have much interest in losers and a guy of his talent level should have been able to bring home some trophy.

Marino was dazzling and put up phenomenal numbers. His lack of SB shiny, it can be argued, could be due to poor Dolphin defenses during that period (that were just a shadow of the 70's legacy Killer B unit that they tried to emulate way too long, just as Noll and Steelers faded in the later 80s. OTOH, his teams (counting his days at Pitt when Pitt was a national powerhouse program) always seemed to "choke" in the big game -- he lost SB and Cotton Bowl in senior year that a victory would have netted national championship. It was pre-BCS era, and arguably the prior year, with only 1 loss, they should have netted national championship with Sugar Bowl win over Georgia but undefeated Clemson (a team that by today standard would be cast off as a Boise State wannabe, as ACC was not a major conference in likes of Big-10 or major independents like Pitt, Notre Dame, Penn State) beat a 2L Nebraska team and got it.

Oh, and I hate the BCS and prefer the old bowl system, at least in lieu of a REAL championship playoff…


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 08, 2011, 10:04:09 AM
Hey, I'm a McNabb fan/apologist but I don't think he's Hall of Fame material. I just don't think he's as bad as the haters say. He won't be in the Hall because he has no ring and his stats aren't the gaudy numbers that a guy without a ring like Marino has.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on September 08, 2011, 10:09:23 AM
Hey, I'm a McNabb fan/apologist but I don't think he's Hall of Fame material. I just don't think he's as bad as the haters say. He won't be in the Hall because he has no ring and his stats aren't the gaudy numbers that a guy without a ring like Marino has.

I want to go on record as stating that I'm not a McNabb hater.  He was good in his prime.  I just happen to think that he is past his prime. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on September 08, 2011, 10:35:40 AM
Hey, I'm a McNabb fan/apologist but I don't think he's Hall of Fame material. I just don't think he's as bad as the haters say. He won't be in the Hall because he has no ring and his stats aren't the gaudy numbers that a guy without a ring like Marino has.

I want to go on record as stating that I'm not a McNabb hater.  He was good in his prime.  I just happen to think that he is past his prime. 

No debate on that from me.  He's done.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 08, 2011, 10:50:56 AM
Yeah, he's been done for the last 2-3 years, he just happened to show it when he got on a bad team like the Skins.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 08, 2011, 11:00:15 AM
I'm also not a McNabb hater.  He had a couple of very, very good years.  Now he's  :geezer:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on September 08, 2011, 11:12:37 AM
Marino was dazzling and put up phenomenal numbers. His lack of SB shiny, it can be argued, could be due to poor Dolphin defenses during that period (that were just a shadow of the 70's legacy Killer B unit that they tried to emulate way too long, just as Noll and Steelers faded in the later 80s.

FYI, the Killer B defenses where from the early 80s.  The Dolphins had the #1 defense statistically the year they lost the SB to the Redskins.  The great 70s defenses where the 'No Name' defenses.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on September 08, 2011, 11:12:40 AM
Sure there is.  Marino was the highest statistically productive passer of all time for a while and merits discussion in the all time greats.  He was on shitty teams a good deal of the time.  I just don't have much interest in losers and a guy of his talent level should have been able to bring home some trophy.

That makes no sense for HOF criteria in a team sport. He's very clearly at least in the top 5 QBs of all time. It isn't like he was the guy holding them back.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on September 08, 2011, 11:26:48 AM
Marino was dazzling and put up phenomenal numbers. His lack of SB shiny, it can be argued, could be due to poor Dolphin defenses during that period (that were just a shadow of the 70's legacy Killer B unit that they tried to emulate way too long, just as Noll and Steelers faded in the later 80s.

FYI, the Killer B defenses where from the early 80s.  The Dolphins had the #1 defense statistically the year they lost the SB to the Redskins.  The great 70s defenses where the 'No Name' defenses.

/thanks, you are correct, I was confusing "No Name" with Killer B!

But they (defensive unit) fell off quickly after that SB Redskin loss (which was a year before Marino rookie season). I mean, even their 84 SB loss (to another Pittsburgh born QB playing for SF), they gave up 28 points in a championship game to a team QB by Mark Malone  :-P


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on September 08, 2011, 11:36:56 AM
Oh yeah, the defense fell off a cliff in the mid 80s.  As did the running game.  Even Elway didn't win a superbowl until the Broncos found a good running game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 08, 2011, 11:37:32 AM
That makes no sense for HOF criteria in a team sport. He's very clearly at least in the top 5 QBs of all time. It isn't like he was the guy holding them back.

I'm not going to argue that Marino shouldn't be in the HOF and never said he shouldn't be.  I just don't like him that much as a QB.  I would rather have Tom Brady all day long over Marino.  McNabb should definitely not be inducted.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on September 08, 2011, 11:55:19 AM
Oh I agree, but because of career/peak numbers reasons, not because of championships.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on September 08, 2011, 12:02:15 PM
Should we talk about Barry Sanders next?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 08, 2011, 12:12:48 PM
Should we talk about Barry Sanders next?

 :heartbreak:

I was such a huge fan and when he left, I was devastated.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on September 08, 2011, 12:41:31 PM
Well, looks like Manning is out until at least November.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on September 08, 2011, 12:45:16 PM
Well, looks like Manning is out until at least November.

I think he'll be done for the season.  By the time he is ready to play, I suspect they are going to be out of it, and they won't bother bringing him back for a 3-4 games that don't mean anything.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 08, 2011, 12:56:35 PM
It is my fault- I killed him. I kept him in my keeper league.

I think there is a pretty good chance his career is over.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 08, 2011, 01:13:24 PM
It is my fault- I killed him. I kept him in my keeper league.

I think there is a pretty good chance his career is over.

Wouldn't go THAT far. He might not ever be the Manning of old, but hell... who is when they round the bend in age. Either way, I see Peyton becoming a huge success as a player-turned-coach and will net a ring or two that way as well. The man is too football smart not to take a step into coaching after his playing days.

But back to the real issue, Houston best send you a thank you gift basket.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 08, 2011, 01:24:01 PM
Well, this thing doesn't seem to be getting any better for him and he is getting up there.  I wouldn't be surprised to see this force him to hang it up.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 08, 2011, 09:21:09 PM
If it's a nerve issue in his neck, that's definitely a potential career-ender. That kind of stuff is worse than a hamstring for being hard as hell to track.

Also...

PACKERS 42 - SAINTS 34

WHAT A FUCKING GAME!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on September 09, 2011, 03:35:19 AM
Great way to start the season, there was a lot of fireworks.  I'd say the Chargers are in agony watching Sproles' performance.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on September 09, 2011, 05:39:49 AM
He had a career day on returns but that just means he's gonna have 2-3 fair catches next week to get himself back on pace.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on September 09, 2011, 05:42:28 AM
Only got to watch the second half, but it was very exciting.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 09, 2011, 05:47:58 AM
We may have just watched the real superbowl right there.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 09, 2011, 06:02:40 AM
We may have just watched the real superbowl right there.

You obviously didn't look at my picks  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on September 09, 2011, 07:07:18 AM
Loved the game.  Sproles' role is interesting and will drive defenses nuts.  That one play up the middle was impressive.  His threat will keep safeties honest.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on September 09, 2011, 10:47:14 AM
McNabb was always a good QB never a great one.  He is no where near a HOF QB.

Also, fantastic game last night!  Happy the season is now here, wooo!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 09, 2011, 11:48:39 AM
Loved the game.  Sproles' role is interesting and will drive defenses nuts.  That one play up the middle was impressive.  His threat will keep safeties honest.

There's a reason I picked up Sproles in both my fantasy leagues. The guy is every bit the player Bush is and he's been more durable than Bush so far. Returns, catching out the backfield and the occasional run, he's going to be the guy you have to account for in the defensive gameplan. There are few players I ever seen who have such smooth, insane acceleration as him.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on September 09, 2011, 12:39:38 PM
His point production in fantasy will vary a lot, though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 09, 2011, 07:31:21 PM
We may have just watched the real superbowl right there.

You obviously didn't look at my picks  :awesome_for_real:

I just did.  You're wrong.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 09, 2011, 07:55:01 PM
The Cardinals are the obvious Super Bowl champions! THE PACKERS ARE A FLUKE!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on September 11, 2011, 12:28:16 PM
Watching the Steelers get dismantled has made my entire week.  It's not that I dislike the Steelers, it's that I dislike their fans.  Not having to listen to them for a week at work is like a gift.  


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2011, 12:32:17 PM
Bills are coming through for me today in a huge way. Good job Stevie Johnson!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 11, 2011, 02:03:11 PM
Bills are coming through for me today in a huge way. Good job Stevie Johnson!

Ex Kentucky player.  He's tough. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2011, 02:23:19 PM
49ers and Seahawks are putting on the most god-awful display of football of the week.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 11, 2011, 03:00:41 PM
Jeezus, the Colts are bad, but I didn't think they'd be this bad, even with Collins.

And wtf ATL?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 11, 2011, 03:03:08 PM
49ers and Seahawks are putting on the most god-awful display of football of the week.

So fucking bad. God this season is already dragging and it is barely .5 games old.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2011, 03:49:55 PM
I'm glad I grabbed Akers. He's going to get a ton of work on the 49ers.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on September 11, 2011, 04:30:55 PM
Wow Ginn returns TWO for TD's!  Poor Pete Carrol, he looks positively befuddled.  Titans look not quite ready for prime time, Atl FTL, Giants are as soft as a baby's ass, and the Lions, that's right the Lions, won!

I just knew they were doomed when Boomer "Matt Millen is a genius compared to me" Esiason picked the Lions as a playoff team.
As a Lions fan, I can't even dare to hope.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2011, 05:16:04 PM
Inc Eli face!

(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_uB4XtJOIM5Y/TRJW6zIE6HI/AAAAAAAAAQk/HWCfZ3coxjQ/s1600/eli-manning111.getty.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on September 11, 2011, 05:29:14 PM
Slight derail but what's up with Eli's psyche?

Peyton QB's in college.  So does Eli.
Peyton goes to the NFL.  So does Eli.
Peyton shills for Sony.  Eli shills for Samsung.

Psst. Eli.  YOU WILL NEVER BE PEYTON AND YOUR PARENTS LOVE HIM MORE.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on September 11, 2011, 07:33:35 PM
Watching the Steelers get dismantled has made my entire week.  It's not that I dislike the Steelers, it's that I dislike their fans.  Not having to listen to them for a week at work is like a gift.  

Its my only regret about being on vacation right now and out of town .  The city apparently went completely apeshit over it.   I had to settle for running around the condo I'm renting screaming my head off.  God, what a game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 11, 2011, 07:38:51 PM
Watching the Steelers get dismantled has made my entire week.  It's not that I dislike the Steelers, it's that I dislike their fans.  Not having to listen to them for a week at work is like a gift.  

Its my only regret about being on vacation right now and out of town .  The city apparently went completely apeshit over it.   I had to settle for running around the condo I'm renting screaming my head off.  God, what a game.

I for one can't wait to get into work tomorrow and start sipping the tears. I really should have marketed my terrible tissues....  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 11, 2011, 08:36:17 PM
Tony Romo continues to be a cocksucking choke artist.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on September 11, 2011, 10:25:16 PM
The FFB league I'm in this season only has 8 teams, so we decided to do some wacky shit this year. Like allow two starting quarterbacks.

I have Manning the Lesser, Tony Romo, and Jay Cutler. Autodraft is awesome. :why_so_serious:


I am pretty displeased about the Giants but ... I dunno. I've been expecting it to be shitty, so it's hard to be disappointed.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on September 12, 2011, 01:33:43 AM
Because I just moved back to Europe, I decided to sign up for NFL Red  Zone for the first time ever - I only managed to watch the early games, but HOLY SHIT do you get to see a lot of football over those three hours.  It's like watching 10 hours of football.  A little exhausting, even...it's non-stop action, something happening all the time.

Highly, highly recommended if any of you are on the fence about getting Red Zone.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 12, 2011, 08:06:16 AM
Yeah RZ is the tits. Nothing like 8 hours of no commercial football!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 12, 2011, 08:19:25 AM
My Sunday recap:

Holy fuck, Ravens Defense, save some for the rest of my fantasy team. Also, Ray Rice Beast Mode HOOOOOOOOO!!!! This team should not be this good, even at home. It's early yet, but I may have been completely wrong about the Ravens' chances this year. The Steelers are better than this by FAR. I fell asleep during most of this game, but what I saw was ugly.

Atlanta... seriously? What the fuck was wrong with you? I watched like 3 quarters of the most disjointed offense I've seen you play in a while. It's like you were afraid to go down the field in the passing game. There was no continuity to the offense at all. And your defensive coverage sucked monkey ass. You better pick that shit up if you want to compete against New Orleans.

The Redskins defense was much much better than I expected it to be and I expected it to be decent. Maybe it was just that the Giants are REALLY FUCKING BAD. They were really bad and Eli had the Eli face going most of the game and I can't figure out why. They were able to run the ball. They seemed able to pass pretty well. But when it mattered... INTERCEPTION HOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!! The G-men's defense sucked a big fat one, especially their defensive backfield. Either these young Redskins receivers are pretty good (especially this Armstrong kid), your cornerbacks are one-legged cripples or your coverage schemes suck. Rex Grossman really should not have looked that good.

Cowboys and Jets. Hey Tony Romo... you are not Brett Favre, and it doesn't ever appear you will be. Learn to throw from the pocket. Of course, if your O Line could actually pass protect, you might not have to feel you must win the game on your own. Also, Dez Bryant... I've heard potassium pills help with the cramps. Learn to be on the field. Mark Sanchez keeps being exactly what I thought he is. Inconsistent. He only looked good when Dallas' secondary ended up breaking their labias. The rest of the time he looked like Rex Grossman.

In the WTF, Guys? category - Cleveland, Kansas City and Atlanta. At least Atlanta played a division winner from last year. The Bengals and the Bills? Le ugh.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on September 12, 2011, 08:24:25 AM
Yeah RZ is the tits. Nothing like 8 hours of no commercial football!

Except DirecTV fucked over its customers again, viewers getting "free" sample/trial got their NFL Sunday Ticket just dandy but paying customers (including set top boxes, PS3 and online) were screwed most of the 1st game as picture just froze and then a mandatory box reset/reboot was required to view ANY channel. People calling in were treated to a lengthy "hold", then disconnected. Internet traffic roared so much it took down website for awhile. After awhile, their service department (@DirectvService) began responding via Twitter… …that's how customer service is done now in the 21st century, I reckon…  :geezer:

Fortunately, or unfortunately, the Steelers were on the local channel feed, so I got to see the meltdown v. the Ravens. When Ben is struggling, he really is awful, and on par with the Jamarcus Russels and Jason Campbells of the league. The defense, is more troublesome, as its been carved up two games in a row and Troy Polamalu, fresh off his big contract score ($35M + $10M signing bonus for 4 years?) still seems like he's late to the play, every snap. Still, I don't know what all the wailing is about, it just regular season game #1, Ravens, no doubt, much more motivated (after each playoff season being ceremoniously pwned by Steelers) and on home turf and Killer Ray got his juices flowing after folding up the 9/11 flag tribute.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 12, 2011, 08:44:47 AM
Who would have figured I should have started Cutler instead of Big Ben?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 12, 2011, 08:45:48 AM
I'm not a fantasy football guy, but Roethlisberger isn't a stat stuffer.  I wouldn't have expected him to be a good fantasy pick. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 12, 2011, 08:47:47 AM
I'm not a fantasy football guy, but Roethlisberger isn't a stat stuffer.  I wouldn't have expected him to be a good fantasy pick. 

Yeah, but Cutler doing well? That was the shock.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on September 12, 2011, 08:51:35 AM
Rapey's been a decent fantasy start 3 out of the last 4 years.  You could discount last year I suppose since he didn't start the first 4 games.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 12, 2011, 08:53:49 AM
Yeah, I went back and looked at Cutler's stats.  He isn't as good as I remembered, stat wise.  Rapey probably is the better overall pick there. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 12, 2011, 09:01:18 AM
Rapey is a solid fantasy start most games. Cutler is... well, besides being a Cunt is going to have games where he throws the lights out and games where he can't figure out which team is his.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on September 12, 2011, 09:06:52 AM
I won with him last year!  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on September 12, 2011, 09:55:04 AM
It is always preferable for a QB or RB to have one or two HORRENDOUS games a season than it is to have mediocrity every week.  Ben will bounce back. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on September 12, 2011, 11:10:11 AM
Newton did a great job holding down my bench.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Segoris on September 12, 2011, 11:22:48 AM
Who would have figured I should have started Cutler instead of Big Ben?

I had the exact same problem. On one of my teams I chose Big Ben over Cutler (and also had Pits Defense for -5). On paper going into the game it was the better choice. What really hurt was on another team I sat Chi's defense since I had Ryan and Turner so the points each earned wouldn't go against one another, sadly Chi's defense scored more than Ryan and Turner combined. I can't wait for week two so I can put this week behind me. :oh_i_see:





Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on September 12, 2011, 11:28:49 AM
LeSean McCoy  :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on September 12, 2011, 11:33:27 AM
I have Rivers (who I started) and Cutler. Cutler actualy scored slightly higher. The guy has had 16 300 yard games in his career.

Highest scoring entry on my FF team so far this week? Bear's Defence.

 :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on September 12, 2011, 11:36:23 AM
I have Rivers (who I started) and Cutler. Cutler actualy scored slightly higher. The guy has had 16 300 yard games in his career.

Highest scoring entry on my FF team so far this week? Bear's Defence.

 :drill:

In my main league, I played a guy that had both Urlacher (as an IDP) and the Bear's D.  It wasn't a good week to have the PIT defense. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 12, 2011, 01:18:55 PM
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/6962076/kansas-city-chiefs-safety-eric-berry-rest-2011

Ugh... crushing. I really liked this guy, was sorted sad he didn't get drafted by the Browns... Now, a little more comfortable with their pick instead, but still.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Murgos on September 12, 2011, 02:05:08 PM
I have Rivers (who I started) and Cutler. Cutler actualy scored slightly higher. The guy has had 16 300 yard games in his career.

Highest scoring entry on my FF team so far this week? Bear's Defence.

 :drill:
Rivers is likely to perform well every week though.  I wouldn't count on Cutler being that consistent.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on September 12, 2011, 02:06:29 PM
I have Rivers (who I started) and Cutler. Cutler actualy scored slightly higher. The guy has had 16 300 yard games in his career.

Highest scoring entry on my FF team so far this week? Bear's Defence.

 :drill:
Rivers is likely to perform well every week though.  I wouldn't count on Cutler being that consistent.

No!!!!  Rivers sucks and you should start Cutler every week... and trade Rivers to me!  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on September 12, 2011, 07:25:28 PM
Wow, guess it's a good thing I picked Brady as my QB in the second round, even though I fucking hate the Patriots and Brady in particular.   :-o


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: stu on September 12, 2011, 08:44:48 PM
Raiders-Broncos: Penalties are a good thing, right?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 12, 2011, 08:53:26 PM
So yeah, Miami? Sucks. Yes, let's switch our offense to a pass crazy offense with a QB who has thrown more INT's than TD's in his career and who most people aren't convinced can be a good backup QB. And let's ditch our power running game for Reggie Bush (who looked good early) and someone who can't punch it in from the 1. Let's rely on our defense... oh, yeah that's not going work either. Yes, tonight's game was against Tom Brady and the Pats but still. It's going to be a long season for the Fins.

There was a Broncos/Raiders game tonight?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on September 12, 2011, 09:10:36 PM
For once, Henne actually wasn't the problem even though he saved his miscues for the red zone.  Relying on the awful, awful Daniel Thomas to provide the followup punch to Reggie Bush is what will sink their offense.  Not that it matters much considering how terrible the defense looked.  I don't care if it's the Patriots, you just don't give up over 500 yards passing.  Going to be along year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on September 12, 2011, 09:31:23 PM
From what I saw of the game, the Dolphins defense was just dazed and confused the entire game.

Brady would be throwing the pass already, while the Dolphins were still trying to figure out who was covering what.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on September 13, 2011, 07:10:25 AM
I agree.  Miami was not ready for week 1. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 13, 2011, 09:01:13 AM
Just think, at this rate, Brady is on par to throw 8000y for the season. Move over Marino!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 13, 2011, 11:33:56 AM
Henne definitely didn't look bad. But he's the wrong kind of QB to go for the ZOMGLOOKPASS offense. And not having a big, strong back to grab those 3rd and 1 and 4th and 1 situations is going to kill them. Reggie Bush is not a feature back, no matter what he might want people to think. He was actually used to best effect the way they used him in New Orleans. If he makes it to 10 games, I'll be surprised.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Stewie on September 14, 2011, 11:52:09 AM
No offense HaemishM, but you don't know what you are talking about.

Henne is a pure thrower and is exactly the right kind of QB for a "ZOMGLOOKPASS" offense. They have been misusing him his 1st 3 years in the league. Dan Henning was a horrible O coordinator.
You talk about picks but in actuality he has thrown less picakble balls then Mark Sanchez (amongst others) . In fact he had 1 picakble ball dropped last year, This is the least of any starting QB in the league. Again comparing him to Sanchez who had 15 pickable balls dropped.  (Stats from PFF)

This year you will see them probably end up closer to the average.
Henne was actually fairly accurate when he was allowed to throw. You saw evidence of that Monday night.
My main knocks on him (I have watched every snap he has taken as a pro) is he gets a bit excited and overcooks his touch passes and he doesn't quite think the game fast enough, both of these will come with time and it already looks like the game is starting to slow down for him a bit.
 
You also talk about the dolphins power running game.
Quote
And not having a big, strong back to grab those 3rd and 1 and 4th and 1 situations is going to kill them
 
This year rookie Daniel Thomas is supposed to fill that roll, he was out in game 1 with a pulled hamstring. But he should be back in game 2. Although I am worried that he is not capable of being a solid starter. He runs too vertically and tends to go down to easy. That being said it looks like they are trying to correct that from what i could see of his preseason carries.

either way the run 1st O they were trying to run was not working. you have a gunslinger for a QB use that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on September 14, 2011, 11:54:44 AM
With the continuing value and athletic ability improvements in defensive players, I think that teams are nearly forced to find a quality FB to make the running game viable.  Quality FB's are a rare breed.  If you can find one that also has a pair of hands, you win.   


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 14, 2011, 02:04:45 PM
Wait, you're calling Chad Henne a GUNSLINGER QB? Really?

I'm willing to admit I may not know shit about what I'm talking about, but I do not rate Henne a gunslinger QB. Romo is a gunslinger. Favre was a gunslinger. Henne is going to end up being at best a Kyle Orton type. Comparing him to Sanchez is unfair to Henne, because Sanchez is about as accurate as I would be in his spot. Sanchez sails more passes than just about anyone I've seen other than Rex Grossman. I think Henne absolutely needs a running game to be anywhere near effective, and relying on Bush and a rookie RB is going to hurt him a lot.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on September 14, 2011, 02:19:44 PM
No, Henne is closer to a 'gunslinger' type than a dink and dunk west coast offense type, at least going by his physical tools.  He has a very big arm.  His problem is he lacks any kind of touch (as seen in the red zone on Monday) and he's not a quick decision maker.  I always thought he'd be a decent quarterback if he ever got an offensive coordinator who didn't suck giant donkey balls.  Not Farve/Manning/Brady awesome or anything, but decent.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 14, 2011, 02:34:30 PM
I think "gunslinger" refers more to the heroics, rather than the ability to throw the ball through a brick wall.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 14, 2011, 02:59:47 PM
Henne sucks. People like his arm, but he's one of the only starting QBs from last year (that doesn't play in the crappy western divisions) with a negative TD-INT margin. He sucks in getting passes over 20+. He sucks in passer rating. He's average in completions.

What people see in this guy, I have no idea, but he plays in a divison where he's going to get stomped anyway, so who cares? Hell, I think the Bills finish better than them because I actually think Fitzpatrick is a decent QB


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 15, 2011, 07:28:47 AM
What people see in this guy, I have no idea, but he plays in a divison where he's going to get stomped anyway, so who cares? Hell, I think the Bills finish better than them because I actually think Fitzpatrick is a decent QB

^ This. ^

The Dolphins play in a tough ass division, even in seasons when the Bills suck - and it doesn't appear the Bills suck as bad as normal this season. To entirely ditch your offensive system in favor of a system that doesn't favor the players you have on your team, with a QB who didn't even perform that well in your system that needed nothing more from a QB than not to make too many mistakes? Retarded. Henne is just not the guy you want in a pass happy offense, especially when they could have drafted any one of a shitton of better QB's or traded for one. Hell, they'd have done better signing David Garrard than expecting Henne to unfuck his issues throwing the ball. In a pass happy offense, it's going to ALL be on the QB. He is not going to be able to handle that, especially if their defense is half as bad as they showed Monday night.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 15, 2011, 07:34:20 AM
Maybe they should run the Wildcat more. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 15, 2011, 07:40:26 AM
I wouldn't go THAT far. Fucking hate the Wildcat.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 15, 2011, 07:41:51 AM
I wouldn't go THAT far. Fucking hate the Wildcat.

I wasn't serious.   :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on September 15, 2011, 03:02:28 PM
Screw you guys, the Wild Cat is awesome! Everyone should run a wildcat!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on September 16, 2011, 12:23:30 AM
The biggest problem with the wildcat is that everyone uses their regular old running back, and you can expect them to run it up the middle on 10 plays out of 10.  A good wildcat would be where the defense has no idea what is about to happen, and you can only do that with a pretty gifted runner/thrower.  Even the teams who put that guy on the field still end up running the ball up the damn middle, or running some obvious option towards the sidelines.  The wildcat should be a trick play where, while the defense knows it's a trick, they have no idea how it will unfold.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 16, 2011, 04:44:18 PM
I think the wildcat is stupid.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on September 18, 2011, 10:26:52 AM
 There needs to be a penalty for when a QB looks longingly at a ref trying to draw a roughing penalty.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 18, 2011, 01:16:57 PM
I wish to redact my KC pick in the other thread... seriously, wtf?  :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 18, 2011, 01:17:38 PM
KC is the new Carolina.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on September 18, 2011, 02:54:43 PM
As much as Harbs would like to protest - the Ravens just put on an amazing portrayal of what a letdown loss looks like.  Fucking hell. 
:sad_panda:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 18, 2011, 03:06:28 PM
KC is the new Carolina.

Sounds like an ACL for Charles. Proper fucked.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on September 18, 2011, 04:21:34 PM
940 yards in two games, the man is a monster.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ruvaldt on September 18, 2011, 05:04:33 PM
KC is the new Carolina.

Sounds like an ACL for Charles. Proper fucked.

He is in my FF league team.  Poor bastard never stood a chance.  Look out, Jahvid Best!  You're next!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ginaz on September 18, 2011, 05:13:49 PM
Who would have thought that after 2 weeks the team that has scored the most points is....the Bills??? :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 18, 2011, 06:38:54 PM
Oh those AFC North standings...  :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on September 18, 2011, 06:56:05 PM
Who would have thought that after 2 weeks the team that has scored the most point is....the Bills??? :ye_gods:

Followed very closely by the Lions!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 18, 2011, 09:12:29 PM
There needs to be a penalty for when a QB looks longingly at a ref trying to draw a roughing penalty.

You have to be talking about Cutler on the penalty that let him get that first TD pass. That was some Mickey Mouse bullshit right there.

Also, nice to watch Mike Vick get taken out of the game by the helmet of his own guy.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on September 19, 2011, 01:04:10 AM

Also, nice to watch Mike Vick get taken out of the game by the helmet of his own guy.

And thus ends my Vick FF experiment.  Possibly.  Please don't tell me I have to start Cutler next week.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on September 19, 2011, 01:15:07 AM
Who would have thought that after 2 weeks the team that has scored the most point is....the Bills??? :ye_gods:

Followed very closely by the Lions!

The Lions have a considerable advantage in points difference.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on September 19, 2011, 03:31:58 AM
Lions and Bills 2-0?  The world has turned upside down.

Surprised but happy the Titans won.  And they did it mostly without Chris Johnson.  Hasselbeck threw for more yards than Stafford!  If they can get some running lanes for Johnson watch out.

Vodka Collins had a mediocre day in the loss(!) to the Browns.  Is McCoy getting his shit together?

So far this season the main stories to me are

1.  Lions and Bills restore the roar and the, uh, stampede.  But it's still a long season.
2.  Cam Newton shooting the mf'ing lights OUT in the NFL.  Over 400 yards again!  Carolina is the best 0-2 team in the league. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on September 19, 2011, 04:02:25 AM
By my very rough calculations, Cam Newton is on pace for approximately 84,000 passing yards, and 204 rushing TDs.

Seriously, I was betting this kid was going to be a bust.  I may even have been hoping for it, because he seems too arrogant form my liking.  But dayamn.  No way does he keep this pace up, but on the other hand, it seems like he may really be legit.  Good for him, I suppose.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on September 19, 2011, 05:03:56 AM
Once there's enough film on Cam, he'll slow down a bit.  He is one hell of a physical specimen though. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2011, 06:29:27 AM
Cam may be the first QB since Peyton to come out of the SEC and actually be worth a damn.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 19, 2011, 06:41:27 AM
And his team is 0-2.  


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2011, 06:47:54 AM
And his team is 0-2.  

Yeah I think Peyton's rookie season he went 0-4 and 3-13 on the year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on September 19, 2011, 06:50:24 AM
Cam may be the first QB since Peyton to come out of the SEC and actually be worth a damn.

Joe Namath and Archie Manning were pretty good. 

I'm not on the Cam bandwagon yet.  I think he's going to struggle as a) teams figure him out and b) as he gets older and loses mobility. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2011, 06:58:10 AM
Obviously we will see as he progresses, but I think he will gain maturity faster than NFL teams figure him out IF he doesn't get Mike Vick sydrome and relies on his talent instead of working hard.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 19, 2011, 07:10:11 AM
I think he's going to be spectacular.  First they need to build a team around him though and, as Nebu said, it will be more telling how things go once they get some film on him.  When defenses are more prepared we will know more about his potential.  What's probably going to make or break him is his work ethic.  Is he going to put in the work to get better or is he going to party and be Matt Leinart?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on September 19, 2011, 08:55:29 AM
Watched most of both of Cam's games and most amazing thing about his yardage is the easy strikes he missed, where he had a receiver wide open and missed wide with the throw, too overly cautious in the red zone, mostly, but other occurrences over the field too. Plus, he forced too many throws to Steve Smith. Yes, teams will evolve game plan for him, but if he develops and improves on throwing accuracy, he'll still be a force.

I find it funny how ballyhooed Tim Tebow was/is, yet not much said about Cam Newton, until he actually got a starting nod.

But to make too much of out 2 games is folly -- the NFL network displayed a chart of all the rookies with 2 400+ yard games -- on that list are such luminaries as Todd Marinovich, Patrick Ramsey, Mark Rypien (yeah, he won a SB, but deteriorated instantly after that moment), etc.…


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 19, 2011, 09:11:56 AM
I find it funny how ballyhooed Tim Tebow was/is, yet not much said about Cam Newton, until he actually got a starting nod.


Newton was the number one pick in the draft.  That says something.  Unless you're talking out of high school, which is notoriously hit and miss.  Even then he was rated pretty highly by Rivals (http://rivals.yahoo.com/florida/football/recruiting/player-Cameron-Newton-41356;_ylt=Aom8LRMlqe.27liGYi70ki5ir5B4). 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 19, 2011, 09:37:30 AM
I might have believed Newton was overrated after doing so well against the Cardinals. But this was the Packers, whose defense is no easy thing to overcome. 400+ yards both games? I'm thinking he may be the real deal. Especially considering the Panthers had NO rushing game whatsoever in either game. That means he was making throws. Yeah, he probably missed a lot he'll make as he gets more experienced, but damn. 4 INT's in two games is to be expected with a rookie. It's too early to anoint him a HOFamer, but he's certainly going to be better than I expected on a really shitty team.

The Lions are for real. Their defense gave up some runs early but then just shut shit down. Cassel got nothing but INT's. Jahvid Best looks like the real deal, and Stafford picked this defense apart. I think they really are going to miss Eric Berry more than anyone could have imagined. Also, the Chiefs need to learn what unnecessary roughness is. The first Detroit TD came on the play after two straight 15 yard penalties for STUPID shit.

The Saints showed the Bears what a lights out passing offense is. Oh and what a sack to the face is, as well. Cutler looked very ordinary and if not for a totally ticky-tack roughing the passer call against the Saints, the Bears might not have scored a TD at all.

The Bills looks legit as well. CJ Spiller is a beast mode runner, and Fitzpatrick may be the best QB they've had since Jim Kelly - which isn't saying much but he won them the game.

I can't even process the Chargers/Patriots game. I only watched bits and pieces of it and what I do know is 1) Tom Brady is money, 2) TE's should not catch the ball that well and 3) the Chargers have some tall get up and get it receivers.

The Eagles/Falcons game was every bit as exciting as advertised. The Falcons have some serious issues against a good pass rushing team and the Eagles defense doesn't seem to be suffering too much from a lack of experienced, quality LB. They are very susceptible to the run because of it, but their pass rush and coverage is just crazy good. Matt Ryan can get it done at home, just not in the playoffs yet. Also, Kafka isn't a bad QB for your 3rd string guy. QB CONTROVERSY!!!!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on September 19, 2011, 09:50:29 AM
Matt Leinart had 400 yards in a game his rookie year.  Just sayin'...  :awesome_for_real:

Newton does look good.  Better and more accurate than I thought he'd be.  Plus, the guy just looks like a monster out there.  Like a fit verison of Daunte Culpepper. Still, he'll come back to earth at some point and despite the gaudy yardage numbers, I'd bet money he finishes the year with more picks than passing TDs. 

Kolb doesn't look that bad right now.  No Kurt Warner, but completely serviceable.

The Chiefs are just something to behold right now.  I'd say, Cassel or not, they're in the lead for Andrew Luck right now. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2011, 09:57:21 AM
I think Cutler just got sacked again.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 19, 2011, 11:17:17 AM
Yeah, Newton will probably have more picks than TD's. What I'm surprised at is that he doesn't have more TE receptions than he does. He's actually spreading the ball around a good bit, though most of them are to Steve Smith. But to hang around with Green Bay, that's a pretty big statement.

Of course, it might be due to the lockout. Defenses seem to be getting torched early this year, and it's probably because the defenses are a few weeks behind the offenses even though they started in training camp at the same time. Kind of how special teams are just fuckawful since none of the scrubs that make up the special teams got anywhere near the workout they should have.

Also, yes, it has been confirmed again. Mike Martz is rubbish at protecting a QB, even on days they aren't playing. Cutler probably gets sacked in line at the grocery store.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on September 19, 2011, 11:20:47 AM
Actually, he breezes through the checkout there because he has no line.  :rimshot:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2011, 11:21:54 AM
 :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 19, 2011, 11:22:12 AM
Actually, he breezes through the checkout there because he has no line.  :rimshot:

Win.  :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on September 19, 2011, 11:49:23 AM
Cutler is also fairly terrible at protecting himself, to be fair.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 19, 2011, 11:52:51 AM
Matt Leinart had 400 yards in a game his rookie year.  Just sayin'...  :awesome_for_real:

And that's really the whole point-  Leinart is really, really talented he just likes to party.  I can't say I blame him that much.  One of the best jobs in the world is holding a clipboard on the NFL sideline.  Leinart would be starting if he would work.  It remains to be seen if Newton has the work ethic and the smarts to make it work long term in the league.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on September 19, 2011, 11:58:58 AM
Oh hey, another black quarterback has his work ethic and smarts questioned immediately on hitting the league, what are the odds?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on September 19, 2011, 12:06:41 PM
Any first round QB with that much athleticism and questionable accuracy is going to be scrutinized.  Nothing despite some of his comments (overblown) has led us to believe that Cam doesn't put in the work or is just in this for the pay day.  Shit, just look at his build.  At least with guys like JaMarcus you could say that he looked like a 300lb wad of chewed bubblegum and didn't seem to take the conditioning requirements of his position seriously.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 19, 2011, 12:38:01 PM
Oh hey, another black quarterback has his work ethic and smarts questioned immediately on hitting the league, what are the odds?

Oh, don't pull that shit.  I have that view of Leinart, who is white, and of Carson Palmer, who is white.  

Look, Newton has it all.  He can obviously get things done and is highly talented.  The point is that the only thing that will hold him back is himself. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2011, 12:55:29 PM
Oh hey, another black quarterback has his work ethic and smarts questioned immediately on hitting the league, what are the odds?

Dude was arrested for stealing a laptop. He allegedly left Florida under 3 counts of academic cheating violations. His dad was accused of pay for play negotiations. One of the most awkward scandals in the NCAA surrounded the kid.

I think he's the going to be fine, but the questions are valid based on his conduct and high-profile SEC quarterbacks generally sucking at the next level. JaMarcus Russell, Brodie Croyle, Jason Campbell, Jake Cutler, Tim Tebow, Matt Stafford, Eric Ainge, Matt Flynn, DJ Shockley, and I can go on and on and on.

Unless your name happens to be Manning.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on September 19, 2011, 01:55:45 PM
I know Matt Flynn doesn't get a lot of play, but then he's under Aaron Rodgers. The one time he did start he had a pretty decent game I thought.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on September 19, 2011, 01:58:14 PM
Meh, I'm not trying to single any of you out, the media drives this stuff as much as anything. But it happens every. Single. Time.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 19, 2011, 02:12:03 PM
Meh, I'm not trying to single any of you out, the media drives this stuff as much as anything. But it happens every. Single. Time.

And until a black QB wins the Super Bowl in the new era of the NFL, it will continue to happen. Just like people questioning whether a QB can be red-headed. Yes, people actually wonder about it. It doesn't just happen with QBs either. There's always the constant questions of recreational marijuana use and laziness that surround young black players coming into the NFL.

I mean it's been 23 years since Doug Williams won in 1988, and these are old ass white guys running a multibillion dollar league. Of course it's racist, but the QB these days is literally the most important total thing on any NFL team.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 19, 2011, 02:44:00 PM
Meh, I'm not trying to single any of you out, the media drives this stuff as much as anything. But it happens every. Single. Time.

I actually haven't read anything in the media about him other than good stuff.  I was just going off the past experience of basically every other fucktard quarterback getting to the league and either being too dumb (Ryan Leaf, Tim Couch) or too lazy (Jamarcus Russel, Matt Leinart) to make it happen.  It's hard to find people that want to continue to work hard once they've gotten that 5 million dollar contract.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 19, 2011, 09:07:43 PM
So, the Giants are a really bad team that manages to win on talent and dumb luck. The Rams are an up and coming team with a stud QB that needs... something. I'm sold on Bradford, but not so much on Josh McDaniels' offense. Bradford seemed to get very little in the way of protection, and I'm reminded of Mike Martz. Lots of gaudy numbers and lots of QB's in the dirt. He also needs a RB (Cadillac Williams did not look starting quality anymore) and some receivers with breakaway speed. Their LB corp looks solid, their front 4 on defense are decent, their corners... not so much.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on September 19, 2011, 09:16:08 PM
Rams top RB and WR were both out with injuries and that game was still a lot closer than the score would indicate.  On the other hand, their schedule is brutal outside of their division.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on September 19, 2011, 10:04:14 PM
So, the Giants are a really bad team that manages to win on talent and dumb luck.


I'll take it!  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on September 20, 2011, 12:52:28 PM
Hey, I'll take the defense making the Rams settle for FGs a few times from inside the 20.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Segoris on September 20, 2011, 02:17:13 PM
Hey, I'll take the defense making the clock stop by being soccer pussies with fake injuries

 :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on September 20, 2011, 02:47:56 PM
Best part of the Monday night game was watching Laurinitis play.  The guy is a beast. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 20, 2011, 03:06:19 PM
Best part of the Monday night game was watching Laurinitis play.  The guy is a beast. 

That's what stood out to me about the Rams defense, how well ALL their linebackers tackled. There were a few times where he in particular just grabbed a motherfucker with both arms and pulled the runner down on strength alone. It was awesome.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 20, 2011, 03:10:49 PM
You should be a beast with a name like Laurinitis.  That's pretty much badass. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 20, 2011, 03:14:05 PM
That was a terrible MNF game. I lost all interest by halftime.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on September 20, 2011, 03:14:54 PM
That was a terrible MNF game. I lost all interest by halftime.

This was my favorite part of the game:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ_uvxsfGpY&feature=player_embedded

(http://30.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lrt1qcw3fq1qdlh1io1_250.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 20, 2011, 03:23:37 PM
Haha, what a dick.

Giants. Lulz.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on September 20, 2011, 03:42:25 PM
Ha, I remember that but I didn't think it actually hit him at the time. Any gifs yet of the two Giants dropping at the same time for an injury timeout?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on September 20, 2011, 07:55:46 PM
That seems like it could instigate a lawsuit in the future. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ruvaldt on September 22, 2011, 09:29:32 PM
Ha, I remember that but I didn't think it actually hit him at the time. Any gifs yet of the two Giants dropping at the same time for an injury timeout?

Yep!

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v180/devofreak/Football_players_diving.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on September 22, 2011, 11:02:16 PM
Haha what the shit, how is that not a penalty?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on September 23, 2011, 01:13:52 AM
 :facepalm:

Oh, Giants!  :awesome_for_real:


PS: Grant is clearly the better actor.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 23, 2011, 06:10:23 AM
SNIPER!

<flop>


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on September 23, 2011, 06:21:44 AM
Really, what a half ass attempt on both their parts...better to spectacularly over-do it than that lame shit.  They could learn a great deal by watching Italian soccer.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Segoris on September 23, 2011, 07:04:13 AM
Those fake injuries are why I fixed Draegan's quote a few posts back, what shit.

Haha what the shit, how is that not a penalty?

Supposedly there is no penalty for faking an injury because the refs are not to determine if players are or are not injured, which is understandable as they aren't medical professionals and this is a high impact sport.

What really sucks, besides those players being bitches, is that as the rules are written there will not even be any fines unless they admit to faking :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 23, 2011, 07:09:41 AM
So American football and swinging around to World football antics. Great. I think, however, that the whole "be a man / suck it up" mentality will push this shit away fairly quickly. I have to believe faking an injury in the NFL is taboo with all the manly stories of players playing hurt.

Unless of course this is whiplash from all the tiptoeing around head injuries and not being able to come back into a game even though they "feel fine." I can see that as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on September 23, 2011, 07:11:15 AM
Easy solution: You go down on the field, you sit out 15 mins of game time at a minimum. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 23, 2011, 07:28:09 AM
Easy solution: You go down on the field, you sit out 15 mins of game time at a minimum. 

Yep. If you're injured enough to go down, you're out for a period of time. I would say the series.

Also, you should apply this thinking to defenses only.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Segoris on September 23, 2011, 07:48:49 AM
So American football and swinging around to World football antics. Great. I think, however, that the whole "be a man / suck it up" mentality will push this shit away fairly quickly. I have to believe faking an injury in the NFL is taboo with all the manly stories of players playing hurt.

Unless of course this is whiplash from all the tiptoeing around head injuries and not being able to come back into a game even though they "feel fine." I can see that as well.

It is definitely taboo and will be laughed at and looked down upon by fans and other players, current, retired, and future. The part that makes this even tougher to penalize is that both the Giants players said they had "cramps" which is something that can't be denied and something that can't be proven. Though, an interesting story has popped up about an ex-Giant player who played for their current defensive coordinator, stating that Perry Fewell (Giant's Defensive Coordinator)teaches his players to do this and Fewell's only response to the accusations is to say that he can't say he does and can't say he doesn't teach this to players :oh_i_see:

As for the suck it up mentality to push it away, it just so happened to be on the same weekend that Romo brought Dallas to a win while he had a punctured lung and broken rib after being down by 10 points. So yeah, that is a story strong enough to help keep this story out of the spotlight more than if Romo hadn't played and won in his condition

Easy solution: You go down on the field, you sit out 15 mins of game time at a minimum. 

Yep. If you're injured enough to go down, you're out for a period of time. I would say the series.

Also, you should apply this thinking to defenses only.

What would be interesting, and what I'd love to see, is if any player who is injured has to sit out at minimum until the ball changes possession or have some sort of minimum time frame like 3-5 minutes. It was reported earlier that the Competition Committee already turned down the idea of automatically charging a time out for players who are injured at any point in the game (not just in the last two minutes of either half) so that is out.

Though, Paelos, why do you think a rule change like this should only apply to defenses? Offenses could easily abuse this as well, such as to get an offensive lineman a breather.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 23, 2011, 07:55:10 AM
Defenses are the ones dropping because they are trying to slow down hurry up offenses. Offenses can't abuse this because they would only use it at the end of games, and there are already time out rules in place to deal with that (run offs).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Segoris on September 23, 2011, 08:16:17 AM
IIRC, that's only within the last two minutes of a half though. I think I'd like to see that part of the rule lifted so it applies to any point in the half or during the last 5-7minutes


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 25, 2011, 12:02:23 PM
Dear Giants,

Most NFL teams, when they go up 14-0 in the first quarter, tend to not just be content with that and actually try to get more points. You might want to look into that.

signed,
People that felt good picking you an hour ago.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 25, 2011, 12:19:15 PM
Dear Giants,

Most NFL teams, when they go up 14-0 in the first quarter, tend to not just be content with that and actually try to get more points. You might want to look into that.

signed,
People that felt good picking you an hour ago.

Prevent defenses win championships!!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Azuredream on September 25, 2011, 01:24:21 PM
The Bills and Lions are both 3-0. How is this possible?

edit: Also, I feel bad for anyone who paid money to see the Cincinnati/SF game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on September 25, 2011, 02:38:10 PM
The Bills game was pretty intense too!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on September 25, 2011, 02:38:43 PM
Lions OT shocker!  The last time they won in the Metrodome Bruce Willis had a full head of hair.

Oh and a big FU to Sterling Sharpe who jumped off the Lions bandwagon at halftime.  

Grats to Bills as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on September 25, 2011, 02:49:19 PM
Go Browns...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on September 25, 2011, 02:57:07 PM
I think the Browns have a future with McCoy.  Heck, they are 2-1, maybe the future is here.

The Falcons/Bucs game is bruising.  These teams don't like each other.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Azuredream on September 25, 2011, 04:02:16 PM
I don't know, we're 2-1 but our wins are over Miami who look awful this year and Indy minus Peyton Manning. I'm still dreading the 5-game stretch at the end of the year where they stuffed all 4 of our games against Baltimore and Pittsburgh into that little time frame.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on September 25, 2011, 04:42:19 PM
People always forget that the Bills-Pats matchups are for whatever reason always interesting.  Even last year when the Bills had this completely god awful record, the Bills Pats game was a lot closer than you'd think it should have been.  Congrats to the Bills though for winning the close one today. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on September 25, 2011, 04:43:20 PM
Can someone explain what that penalty was for on the punt return?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on September 25, 2011, 04:56:20 PM
During the Bears/Packers game?

Quote
@MikePereira (https://twitter.com/#!/MikePereira/status/118105209993035777): On Knox punt return, #21 held the gunner and he grabs and pulls him from behind early in the kick, you can only see it in the live shot. #Week3


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on September 25, 2011, 05:02:21 PM
Ok then; was a bit of confusion here.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on September 25, 2011, 05:16:54 PM
People always forget that the Bills-Pats matchups are for whatever reason always interesting.  Even last year when the Bills had this completely god awful record, the Bills Pats game was a lot closer than you'd think it should have been.  Congrats to the Bills though for winning the close one today. 


As interesting as losing 15 straight before today can be, I suppose.  Only consolations to the Dolphins sucking ass this year are: it's a matter of when, not if Sporano will be fired now; the Bucs are starting to play better; and at least the Patriots also lost.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on September 25, 2011, 05:20:51 PM
Do I want to know how the Dolphins lost by 1?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 25, 2011, 05:57:45 PM
Do I want to know how the Dolphins lost by 1?

No, you really don't.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on September 25, 2011, 10:37:33 PM
The Bills' offense is actually really good.  I think adding Fred Jackson to the mix has really given them a jolt.  Interesting to see how the rest of their year plays out.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on September 26, 2011, 02:25:37 AM
God damn, did Brady forget he had any receiver other than Gronkowski?   


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on September 26, 2011, 03:13:38 AM
Did you mean Wes Welker?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on September 26, 2011, 03:24:20 AM
That Saints/Texans game looked crazy good.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on September 26, 2011, 07:11:34 AM
Did you mean Wes Welker?


I posted in the wrong NFL thread really.  Mostly, it was me bitching that Brady+Gronkoski had well over 50 points between the two of them.  I missed seein g that Welker put up 30+ himself as well.  Disgusting.
 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 26, 2011, 08:09:03 AM
What a Sunday. To the Eagles and Patriots... SUCK IT, DOUCHEBAGS. Also, Michael Vick? STFU. You don't get the 15-yard penalties for 2 reasons: 1) you are constantly running around which is caused by 2) your O Line sucks ass. You aren't getting unfairly targeted by the refs, you're getting killed out there by an O Line that can't pass block for a jackrabbit. The Giants won that game because you threw INT's at bad times and you are not going to last the season at this rate. To the Eagles owners that decided to give this convict $40 million in guaranteed money? REAP WHAT YOU FUCKING SOW.

The Giants are a really bad team, BTW. Victor Cruz scored two touchdowns, one of which he scored because 2 of your corners looked like Keystone Cops and can't tackle for shit. The other TD at least looked like Cruz muscled the ball away from you.

The Saints and Texans was a crazy crazy ass game. Neither defense seemed like they could stop the other, except when it got to the red zone. Houston should have won that game but they had what 4, 5 red zone field goals instead of TD's? Just one of those 3 pointers turned into 7 would have made a huge difference. The Saints really need to be concerned about their secondary. It got shredded and not just by Andre Johnson. Houston's defense actually looked better than last year, which isn't saying much.

Minnesota? You suck hard. Any team that has Adrian Peterson should NEVER lose a 20 point lead. EVER. What's so hard about AP right, AP left, AP up the middle for maintaining possession? And not just once but three straight games they blow second half leads? The Lions are for real. The catch Calvin Johnson made in overtime was fucking incredible. If Stafford can stay healthy, that team is going to be good for a while.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on September 26, 2011, 08:26:42 AM
Minnesota? You suck hard. Any team that has Adrian Peterson should NEVER lose a 20 point lead. EVER. What's so hard about AP right, AP left, AP up the middle for maintaining possession? And not just once but three straight games they blow second half leads? The Lions are for real. The catch Calvin Johnson made in overtime was fucking incredible. If Stafford can stay healthy, that team is going to be good for a while.

From Bill Barnwell's recap (http://www.grantland.com/story/_/id/7019679/upon-initial-review-week-3):

Quote
Breaking Down the Viking Funeral

Since Brett Favre threw that interception in the 2009 NFC Championship Game, the amount of fun involved with being a Vikings fan has declined at a seemingly constant rate. Blowing leads in three consecutive games has not stopped this inexorable march toward relocating the team to Los Angeles. Take heart, Vikings fans: You've had leads in three consecutive games heading into the second half, which is a pretty good sign that there are going to be some wins on the horizon. But don't blame Donovan McNabb.

The biggest difference between the way the Vikings play during the first half of games and the second half has been the relative disappearance of their pass rush. During the first half of their three games so far this year, the Vikings have sacked opposing quarterbacks on 10.3 percent of their dropbacks. No team had a sack rate higher than 9 percent last season, so that would make the first-half Vikings pass rush just about the best unit in football.

During the second half, though, things change. The Vikings have sacked the opposing signal-caller on just three of their 75 dropbacks, which produces a miserly sack rate of 4.0 percent. The worst pass rush in football last year sacked quarterbacks 4.3 percent of the time, so that's right — the Vikings have swung from an elite pass rush to a terrible one during the two halves of their games this year. If they can maintain their pass rush through a full game, well, they'll start winning.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 26, 2011, 08:36:11 AM
I don't think we'll figure out who the Giants are until about week 9. Up until then, their schedule is relatively mundane, except for the Buffalo game which just became must-see TV. Starting on week 9 they have NE and SF on the road, back home for Philly, on the road to New Orleans, home for Green Bay, road in Dallas, home for Washington, road for Jets, home for Dallas.

That's a freaking brutal second half.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on September 26, 2011, 08:39:07 AM
With that schedule, I cannot see the Giants making the playoffs. Their injury problems are already bad, and they just don't play well offensively.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sky on September 26, 2011, 09:21:30 AM
Just got cable turned back on, DVR'd the Bills game.

Thanks, Bills. For the first time in a long time, I've been enjoying your games - actually since they got the kid in at QB, he's entertaining in a young Favre way (seems to be enjoying himself and always plays for the win). Putting in a solid running back has made them a team I actually enjoy watching.

But screw Time Warner and their inexplicable deletion of 10min of the third quarter. It jumped from halftime to 5min left in the 3rd.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on September 26, 2011, 11:09:35 AM
The Bills and the Lions are both fun to watch. High powered offenses run by young guys who haven't hit their full potential yet...great formula for fun neutral viewing. Although I wasn't exactly neutral in the Bills game, because fuck the Patriots, their fuckhead coach, and their dbag fans for eternity.

After watching all the fun in the morning games on RedZone, I then suffered through the Hawks/Cards game. If this was Euro soccer they would both be subject to relegation, and deservedly so. 4 quarters of just awful football.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 26, 2011, 08:36:55 PM
Who needs TDs when you got D-fence?  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on September 26, 2011, 10:14:35 PM
What was wrong with your center lineman tonight? Like 3 or 4 totally fubared snaps to your QB.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Zetleft on September 26, 2011, 11:26:57 PM
What was wrong with your center lineman tonight? Like 3 or 4 totally fubared snaps to your QB.

He was shit last week too.  And shit route running by ogletree almost f'd us as well, with the D playing that well it should have been a blowout.  Oh well at least our kicker was great this week.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on September 27, 2011, 04:00:34 AM
Like, if it was ONE bad snap, fine, nerves or whatever.


But again, then again, then AGAIN. What the shit dude, you have ONE job!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on September 27, 2011, 06:25:22 AM
Rumor has it that the Skins were calling out the cadences on the line and fucking him up. Now, that's a penalty, but the refs have to hear it, and none of them are going to be close enough to the play.

Still, that has nothing to do with the fact his snaps were low and wide.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 02, 2011, 11:15:50 AM
Can't help but feel that Houston not putting Pittsburgh away with a ton of stupid penalties might come back and bite them in the ass in the second half. Wow. Just so many braindead decisions.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on October 02, 2011, 11:24:38 AM
Can't help but feel that Houston not putting Pittsburgh away with a ton of stupid penalties might come back and bite them in the ass in the second half. Wow. Just so many braindead decisions.

It was nice to watch Ben get mauled like most of his dates do, though.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on October 02, 2011, 11:24:45 AM
Can't help but feel that Houston not putting Pittsburgh away with a ton of stupid penalties might come back and bite them in the ass in the second half. Wow. Just so many braindead decisions.

Especially the icing on the cake to ruin a beautiful blocked FG attempt.  Absolutely stupid.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 02, 2011, 12:13:07 PM
I don't know how the Browns beat the Dolphins, they are a bad team.  Browns couldn't hold on to a ball if it was dipped in glue .


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on October 02, 2011, 12:19:57 PM
I don't know how the Browns beat the Dolphins, they are a bad team.  Browns couldn't hold on to a ball if it was dipped in glue .

Pretty sure the local pee-wee team could beat the Dolphins.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 02, 2011, 12:22:12 PM
Dolphins = completely disfunctional


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 02, 2011, 12:22:38 PM
Pretty sure the local pee-wee team could beat the Dolphins.

You mean Kanasas City?  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 02, 2011, 01:01:32 PM
LOL Bungles upset the Bills.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 02, 2011, 01:22:36 PM
OMG LIONS! 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 02, 2011, 01:23:15 PM
OMG LIONS! 

Maybe Barry will come out of retirement to get a ring!!!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 02, 2011, 01:23:54 PM
Romo giveth, and he taketh away. Horrible mistakes.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 02, 2011, 02:04:12 PM
Love Johnson's nickname "Megatron" even if I don't get the reference.  Lions were down 20-3 at the half, they DO like to make it interesting!  This kitten has claws!

KC beat Minnesota.  Looks like McNabb is going to have a Viking eral.  That's 'funeral' without the fun.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 02, 2011, 02:07:25 PM
I will cheer when Minnesota let's Ponder start. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 02, 2011, 02:50:13 PM
OMG LIONS! 

Maybe Barry will come out of retirement to get a ring!!!

He would still be a badass. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Strazos on October 02, 2011, 02:56:57 PM
I am so happy the Eagles are throwing their season away, and in such painful fashion too.

Unfortunately, most of my friends are rabid Eagles fans, so I don't get to say this anywhere else. :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 02, 2011, 03:17:12 PM
The lesson here is that if I pick a team to win the Superbowl you should not put any money on them.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on October 02, 2011, 04:08:01 PM
Got to watch the beloved Packers on TV today because the game was on CBS (only get ABC and CBS).

Their defense is surprisingly like swiss cheese but man, is Rodgers the real deal.

That stupid tip that turned into an INT was pretty much the only mistake he made all day.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 02, 2011, 04:31:15 PM
Tony Romo continues to be a cocksucking choke artist.

Paelos knew more than most people realized.   He said this almost a month ago.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 02, 2011, 04:55:36 PM
Romo's only one problem of the bigger issues with the Cowboys. He can be awe-inspiring in his play, and jaw-dropping in his poor decisions.

The defense is shaky and takes terrible penalties. They give up way too many big plays. The offense is playing hurt in several key positions. We need a bye week badly.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 02, 2011, 05:23:55 PM
Tony Romo continues to be a cocksucking choke artist.

Paelos knew more than most people realized.   He said this almost a month ago.

I thought most people knew this several years ago.   :grin:

And in other news, the Lions look almost decent. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 02, 2011, 08:44:58 PM
Goddamn, Dallas you suck. Also, the Eagles. Suck it down. If anyone deserves to lose after spending shitloads to build a dream team, it's you.

The Packers defense wasn't great, but let's face it, they shut the Broncos down enough to give the ball to Rodgers. He was goddamn lights out today. Is there any set of 5 wideouts that are better than what he's throwing to right now? Even the rookie Cobb could start on other teams.

I had to stop watching the Jets/Ravens game. That was fucking embarrassing shitty slopass football.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 02, 2011, 08:51:47 PM
49ers, worst 3-1 team ever. But I'll take it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 02, 2011, 09:24:33 PM
Worst offense in the league scored 21 unanswered points :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on October 02, 2011, 10:35:49 PM
Every time the Eagles AND the Cowboys completely fuck up and lose, it's the best football weekend ever. And if the Giants ALSO win? Double rainbows, baby, all the way across the sky.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on October 03, 2011, 01:58:20 AM
Except FUCK the Giants.

Man, Detroit sure has some good karma working for them these days...and God knows they deserve it.  Calvin Johnson is also stupidly good at those jump ball situations.  It would almost be better to just automatically commit PI against him and give them the ball on the 1.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 03, 2011, 05:21:14 AM
Even the rookie Cobb could start on other teams.


He's going to end up being very good.  He was the entire Kentucky team last year. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on October 03, 2011, 05:56:23 AM
I will gladly eat my 7-9 prediction for the Lions this year...They are doing what they haven't done in ages (besides win), and that is win close games. They seem to have that killer instinct now that they have sorely lacked. They also have a defense that, once they wake up at halftime, can put some serious pressure on a QB. They are playing strong football.

Also, they could still easily end up 7-9. I've been burned by the Lions for so many years it's still hard to accept victory.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on October 03, 2011, 08:07:04 AM
Just saying, Eli manning currently has the #3 QB rating for the league after four games.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on October 03, 2011, 08:07:19 AM
The Lions scare me because they have a really good defense in general.

Since the Packers still have not really learned how to play solid D this season, that could be bad.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 03, 2011, 08:37:42 AM
I will gladly eat my 7-9 prediction for the Lions this year...They are doing what they haven't done in ages (besides win), and that is win close games. They seem to have that killer instinct now that they have sorely lacked. They also have a defense that, once they wake up at halftime, can put some serious pressure on a QB. They are playing strong football.

Also, they could still easily end up 7-9. I've been burned by the Lions for so many years it's still hard to accept victory.

Their penchant for falling way behind and then coming back will eventually bite them in the ass. If they can start faster, they are going to be real trouble all season. And they are damned fun to watch, which makes Thanksgiving games that much more interesting (finally).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 03, 2011, 09:49:57 AM
The Lions play the Packers on the traditional Thanksgiving Day game. You can bet your ass I will be enjoying the SHIT out of my Thanksgiving. That game is shaping up to be goddamn EPIC. Green Bay's opponents between now and then? Atlanta (2-2 with a really shitty defense and some issues keeping Matt Ryan upright), St. Louis (0-4 and unable to score), Minnesota (0-4, blowing big leads and with McNabb as their QB), bye, San Diego (3-1 but not completely convincing), Minnesota again, Tampa Bay (also unconvincing and young). Detroit's opponents? Chicago (2-2, unable to protect Cutler, gave up 29 points to the Panthers), San Fran (3-1 but HOW?), Atlanta (see above), Denver (1-3 and unless Champ Bailey is back, a secondary with more holes than Swiss cheese), bye, Chicago, Carolina (rookie QB, bad team). It's entirely possible both of those teams could be undefeated on Thanksgiving Day. That would be SUPER EPIC AWESOME.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on October 03, 2011, 10:06:29 AM
I'd crap my pants if that happened. Happily.

Been a long time since I have been so pumped for Sundays. Being a Lions fan your whole life can make them depressing, hopefully the football gods will throw us a bone for a few seasons for our suffering.

Stafford scares me, though. Stay healthy, kid!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 03, 2011, 11:12:19 AM
Stafford should have a clause banning him from masturbating due to the stress on his shoulder.

In more Philly hate news, I felt nothing but sweet sweet victory at watching Vick during his press conference answer the (admittedly) dumb question "How does it feel to have lost 3 games?" The frustration on his face was delicious. Of course, he can to bed on his pile of millions and feel satisfied that it wasn't him that caused them to blow a 20 point lead against Alex Smith.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 03, 2011, 11:32:42 AM
I have to confess that I was impressed by Vick in the press conference.  He did a good job in the game and still took the fall as the leader of his team.  Romo could learn a thing or two from Vick in that regard.  Wow... I never imagined I'd say that Vick acted more humble and mature than Romo in a press conference.  Vick does seem to be accepting the leadership role well.  For good and bad.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 03, 2011, 02:14:06 PM
Vick has had a lot of growing up to do.  I've been very impressed by him in all regards, even if it is mostly lip service.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 03, 2011, 02:38:37 PM
I'm having a hard time getting motivated to watch tonight's game. Tampa isn't great, but can anyone convince me that the Colts will be competitive without Peyton?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 03, 2011, 03:18:31 PM
I'm having a hard time getting motivated to watch tonight's game. Tampa isn't great, but can anyone convince me that the Colts will be competitive without Peyton?

I can give it a shot. Tampa's offense is pretty average. They don't really run the ball, and they don't really pass for that many yards. They get the job done on defense and special teams putting them in advantageous situations. Also, they are vulnerable to a running attack.

The Colts are getting progressively used to the idea Peyton's not coming back. Their first loss was a disaster, the second was by 8, and the third was on a last second field goal. You can certainly believe they are ready to compete against a Tampa offense that walked away with a win by playing a bad Atlanta team that couldn't get out of his own way.

In fact, I think they CAN win. Will they? If they don't turn the ball over, I say yes!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 03, 2011, 04:16:22 PM
I won't watch it, but will check in from time to time.  Vodka Collins still has some football in him.

Also, Romo should not be the starter for Dallas next year unless he completes the season with consistency.  I mean, how many years can Dallas wait for him?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 03, 2011, 04:18:13 PM
Judge Romo when he's uninjured, and has both Dez and Miles in the game.

Then we'll see how the Cowboys look. Thank God we get a bye this week. We need it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on October 03, 2011, 04:19:00 PM
I think I have to watch tonight's game just to see my fantasy team absorb another bad loss.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 03, 2011, 07:02:20 PM
Who the fuck is Curtis Painter and where did he come from?   :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 03, 2011, 07:04:55 PM
Who the fuck is Curtis Painter and where did he come from?   :ye_gods:

A guy with the easiest job in the world.  He's been backing up Manning for the last 3 years. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on October 03, 2011, 11:19:04 PM
Judge Romo when he's uninjured, and has both Dez and Miles in the game.

Then we'll see how the Cowboys look. Thank God we get a bye this week. We need it.

Sorry, but we've seen it.  Injured Tony seems to be better than uninjured Tony.  And as a trio, they've accomplished exactly jack and shit.  Last but not least, fuck the Cowboys.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 04, 2011, 06:02:19 AM
That's fine, write off a 2-2 team going into a bye and getting healthy. We shall see how that goes.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 04, 2011, 06:35:40 AM
And now the delusional Cowboys fan come out to play.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 04, 2011, 06:56:53 AM
And now the delusional Cowboys fan come out to play.   :grin:

Not delusional, just looking at a division where your main competition is two teams who are only one game ahead of you and EXTREMELY shaky on offense as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 04, 2011, 06:59:22 AM
I actually think the Cowboys could potentially still make the Superbowl.  It's not a death spiral they're in.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 04, 2011, 07:17:15 AM
Fans and media always overreact in the NFL. Mondays and Tuesdays are so full of "best ever"  and "worst ever" shit it makes it almost unwatchable.

There are several teams that people are jumping off the bus on after this week. The Falcons, Cowboys, Jets, and Steelers are amongst those on the list. Yet, every single one of them is 2-2. Most of them are in the top 15 in offense (with the exception of the Jets). Three of them are in the top 10 in defense (the Falcons aren't).

These are all good teams with some bad games and injuries, or a major question mark in one area. For the Falcons and Steelers, it's the O-Line. For the Jets and Cowboys, it's the QB. They can all make the playoffs, but I have a hard time saying they would get to the Super Bowl with those questions hanging out there.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 04, 2011, 07:42:44 AM
It's so early in the year.  Even the Eagles could pull it together.  A 10 win team can conceivably make and win the Superbowl. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 04, 2011, 08:10:06 AM
I'll go out on a limb and say the Cowboys won't make the playoffs and it'll be because of Tony Romo. That's not a hard prediction. Of the 4 teams you mentioned, I think they are the most vulnerable to just being TERRIBLE despite all the talent on the team. Romo is a talented QB, he just can't stop stepping on his own dick. And he's got a terrible O line as well, which is going to make him get the happy feet. When he gets happy feet, he makes really great passes and really bad decisions. He's Raplisberger and Favre without the consistent poise. Their schedule is spotty. After the bye they play New England, St. Louis, Philly and Seattle. Two of those games are winnable, and depending on which Philly team shows up, three wins is a possibility. But you know they'll find a way to lose against either the Rams or the Seahawks.

The Jets are in trouble, though. Sanchez is exactly what I keep saying he is - an inconsistent QB with a good arm. His accuracy is for shit, especially when he's pressured or excited. Their next three games are AT New England, home against the Dolphins on Monday night and home against San Diego. It is not out of the realm of possibility that they lose to both the Pats and Chargers, and then they are in a world of hurt going into their bye. They can't run the football (or choose not to, which may be worse) and Sanchez is not consistent enough to win against good defenses on his own. If they stumble against Miami, it gets really ugly. They could go into the bye 2-5. That would be BAD. They have got to sort out their O line issues right quick. They CAN beat New England, but only if they pound the ball and take possessions away from Tom Brady.

I think the Falcons are good enough to make it to the playoffs, provided they remember to run the ball and get their defense sorted. Their defense and O line is what's killing them now - and Roddy White's sudden case of the dropsies. Will 10 wins get them in the playoffs? It's possible but only if Tampa starts to falter.

The Steelers I'm least worried about. Their defense is getting old, the Rapist has a hurt ankle, but they showed last year they are still a force to reckoned with even if the Big Boy can't play.

I think the X-Factor in the NFC right now is the goddamn Giants. This is an AWFUL team at 3-1 - terrible injuries, no names playing in key skill positions, weak in the secondary. They beat the Eagles because their defensive line manhandled the opposition and the Eagles defense are shitty tacklers.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on October 04, 2011, 11:36:58 AM
They aren't the worst 3-1 team though! :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 04, 2011, 12:31:21 PM
Go Niners!  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 04, 2011, 12:32:13 PM
They aren't the worst 3-1 team though! :why_so_serious:

The Niners, and the Titans are fighting for that honor.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 04, 2011, 01:14:30 PM
The Titans have both a running back AND a QB. The Niners are missing one of those.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 04, 2011, 01:31:46 PM
Who is the Titan's quarterback?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 04, 2011, 01:36:21 PM
Hasselback. When he's not injured, he's actually having a really good season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 04, 2011, 01:46:05 PM
The Titans have both a running back AND a QB. The Niners are missing one of those.

I'd say that won't matter. Both teams are almost guaranteed to be 3-3 after their next two games.

The 49ers have to go against Tampa's defense and the Blount Object, and Stafford's Comeback Lions.

Tennessee is facing a pissed off Steelers team who got embarrassed this week, and Houston who is just going to run them right the fuck over.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 04, 2011, 01:47:13 PM
The 49ers run defense is very solid, I'd say they have a chance to beat TB. I expect to lose to Detroit though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 04, 2011, 01:52:01 PM
The 49ers run defense is very solid, I'd say they have a chance to beat TB. I expect to lose to Detroit though.

Normally, I'd say the spread would be -7 for Tampa, but it's in SF so I'm going to guess Tampa -3.5 without looking.

EDIT: Heh, SF -2. I'm betting against that right now.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 04, 2011, 02:17:43 PM
Hasselback. When he's not injured, he's actually having a really good season.

Ah, I'd forgotten about him going to the Titans.  Yeah, he can be decent. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 04, 2011, 06:56:21 PM
I think the X-Factor in the NFC right now is the goddamn Giants. This is an AWFUL team at 3-1 - terrible injuries, no names playing in key skill positions, weak in the secondary. They beat the Eagles because their defensive line manhandled the opposition and the Eagles defense are shitty tacklers.


Hooooooldon.

Statistically, right now Eli is sitting at 104 WBR sitting right behind the ungodly Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady.  3rd best in the league sir.  Suck it haters.

Let's address the no name part.  Bradshaw, while not elite, is certainly not a no-name back, 1200 yards last year in his first year as a starter while splitting time.  Nicks is a premier wide receiver.  Our #2 and #3?  Meh. Manningham is a empty headed idiot, and Cruz is an up and comer when could still be classified as a flash in the pan.

Our secondary isn't bad honestly though we did lose our best CB in the preseason.  I would rate it middle of the pack right now.

So you can take your hate, for now, and stick it up your ass.

P.S.
Cowboy fans are delusional.  

edit:
On the Titans: Chris 2k Johnson has how many yards so far this entire year?  Uhhuh


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on October 04, 2011, 06:59:19 PM
What the fuck is a WBR?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 04, 2011, 07:37:21 PM
Oops: QBR - Quarterback Rating (http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?tabSeq=1&season=2011&seasonType=REG&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&statisticPositionCategory=QUARTERBACK&d-447263-s=PASSING_PASSER_RATING&qualified=true)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 04, 2011, 07:50:05 PM
That's the old passer rating, not QBR:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7050006/nfl-week-4-total-qbr-season-leaders

He's 8th in QBR, which is still pretty good.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 04, 2011, 07:58:58 PM
So you can take your hate, for now, and stick it up your ass.

Ohhhhhh the Giants fan gets 3 wins and they are world beaters, folks! Eli 4 Prez!

Make sure that O line doesn't kill him before your bye week.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 04, 2011, 08:01:53 PM
So you can take your hate, for now, and stick it up your ass.

Ohhhhhh the Giants fan gets 3 wins and they are world beaters, folks! Eli 4 Prez!

Make sure that O line doesn't kill him before your bye week.

Says the fan of the team whose QB's lung got punctured.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 04, 2011, 08:07:30 PM
That's the old passer rating, not QBR:

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7050006/nfl-week-4-total-qbr-season-leaders

He's 8th in QBR, which is still pretty good.

I heard about that and it's interesting but I always put it off as a gimmick ESPN is trying to get their name in somewhere.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on October 04, 2011, 11:28:03 PM
Ahh ok.

I have never been a huge fan of the whole passer rating thing, myself.

But the ESPN metric is all like the BCS, a fucking black box that they put numbers into and gives them something. And it is proprietary.

At least the Passer Rating is from the NFL.

And ya, I am a little less against the whole rating thing now that the Packers QB is the career king on the thing and was basically a tipped ball away from a perfect score this weekend :p


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on October 05, 2011, 01:34:32 AM
Passer Rating is a really weird stat both because its expectations are still set to 1970s values and the scale is all wonky.  It's a bad stat because of the former things and that it just takes "triple crown"-type stats (Yards, Completion %, TDs, Ints) and just chucks them in a blender.  (In the defense of the 70s, that's all they had back then!)  It's much more of a fantasy stat than one concerned with trying to express how good a QB is at getting his team to score points.

Also, when looking at a single game, it's extra worthless because of how it bounds each stat's contribution to the rating.

QBR is a black box but some of its basic concepts don't appear completely crazy (pumping everything through a leverage index is... problematic at least).  And because it's a black box, there's no way to know how it matches up with the research that's already out there or if ESPN ever does anything shady.

I think I'll just stick with these guys (http://footballoutsiders.com/).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 05, 2011, 06:02:51 AM
I'm a Footballguys.com (http://www.footballguys.com/) kinda guy myself.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 05, 2011, 06:54:24 AM
I think the X-Factor in the NFC right now is the goddamn Giants. This is an AWFUL team at 3-1 - terrible injuries, no names playing in key skill positions, weak in the secondary. They beat the Eagles because their defensive line manhandled the opposition and the Eagles defense are shitty tacklers.


Hooooooldon.

Statistically, right now Eli is sitting at 104 WBR sitting right behind the ungodly Aaron Rodgers and Tom Brady.  3rd best in the league sir.  Suck it haters.

Let's address the no name part.  Bradshaw, while not elite, is certainly not a no-name back, 1200 yards last year in his first year as a starter while splitting time.  Nicks is a premier wide receiver.  Our #2 and #3?  Meh. Manningham is a empty headed idiot, and Cruz is an up and comer when could still be classified as a flash in the pan.

Our secondary isn't bad honestly though we did lose our best CB in the preseason.  I would rate it middle of the pack right now.

I've seen the Giants play in 2 of their games. They lost to the Redskins, their secondary getting mostly owned by... SUPER BOWL QUARTERBACK Rex Grossman. Their victory against the Eagles was due to 2 things as I said: an Eagles secondary that couldn't tackle my dead grandmother in the open field and a defensive line that SHREDDED a really shitty Eagles O line. They required a shitty call by the refs to beat Arizona. And they beat a St. Louis team that is really fucking awful.

Yes, Eli has some good numbers. He's not making the mistakes he normally makes. But he's had some real GIFTS for TD throws. Brandon Jacobs pass for a TD in Philadelphia, two long passes to Cruz in Philly. This Giants team is a lucky 3-1. They aren't as bad as the Niners, but they aren't what I would call good.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 05, 2011, 07:01:25 AM
The Cruz TD against the Eagles where the two defenders actually tackle each other on the sidelines while Cruz prances by them?

Yeah, that shit won't happen for the Giants when they play the second half of the season. They have games against Buffalo, NE, GB, NO, Washington, Jets, and 2 against Dallas. Going 4-4 in that stretch would be freaking miracle for them.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 05, 2011, 07:10:32 AM
The 2nd half schedule for the Giants is NOT kind. Being they have been a team under Coughlin that mostly withers in the 2nd half of the season, I'll be very surprised is they go 9-7.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: DLRiley on October 05, 2011, 07:46:41 AM
So how about them skins  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 05, 2011, 08:27:16 AM
This should make Haemish happy.  Henne out for the year (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/miami-dolphins/fl-hyde-column-1005-20111004,0,7067472.column). 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 05, 2011, 08:30:32 AM
This should make Haemish happy.  Henne out for the year (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/miami-dolphins/fl-hyde-column-1005-20111004,0,7067472.column). 

Is Haemish the backup QB?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 05, 2011, 08:33:37 AM
This should make Haemish happy.  Henne out for the year (http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/miami-dolphins/fl-hyde-column-1005-20111004,0,7067472.column). 

Is Haemish the backup QB?

Might as well be.  Wasn't he bitching about how bad Henne is a few pages back?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 05, 2011, 09:41:30 AM
It ought to be good news for Dolphins' fans. They should go out and get Garrard who has somehow not found a job. How the fuck does that happen when guys like Rex Grossman and Tavaris Jackson are STARTERS?

Or they could just see how long it takes for Matt Moore to get injured for the season trying to throw without a running game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 05, 2011, 10:04:40 AM
It ought to be good news for Dolphins' fans. They should go out and get Garrard who has somehow not found a job. How the fuck does that happen when guys like Rex Grossman and Tavaris Jackson are STARTERS?

Or they could just see how long it takes for Matt Moore to get injured for the season trying to throw without a running game.

Or they could talk to Cincinnati and negotiate a deal for Carson Palmer.

Palmer, no great shake (only 2 great seasons, and one of them was at USC), but better than what they got.

Or maybe they could press Brett Favre to come out of retirement, or maybe even lure Dan Marino. Bob Griesie, OTOH, might be a tad too old…


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: carnifex27 on October 05, 2011, 10:14:54 AM
Hasselback. When he'snot injured has an o-line, he's actually having a really good season.
fify


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on October 05, 2011, 10:35:23 AM
It ought to be good news for Dolphins' fans. They should go out and get Garrard who has somehow not found a job. How the fuck does that happen when guys like Rex Grossman and Tavaris Jackson are STARTERS?

Or they could just see how long it takes for Matt Moore to get injured for the season trying to throw without a running game.

Or they could talk to Cincinnati and negotiate a deal for Carson Palmer.

Palmer, no great shake (only 2 great seasons, and one of them was at USC), but better than what they got.

Or maybe they could press Brett Favre to come out of retirement, or maybe even lure Dan Marino. Bob Griesie, OTOH, might be a tad too old…

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7062148/miami-dolphins-try-qbs-chad-henne-hurt-source-says

Looks like slim pickings.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 05, 2011, 10:54:22 AM
Holy shit. How bad does your organization have to look to decide that you'd rather just not play football then play in Miami at QB? Garrard and Delhomme told them to get bent?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 05, 2011, 10:59:15 AM
Bring back Vinnie!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 05, 2011, 11:06:14 AM
Holy shit. How bad does your organization have to look to decide that you'd rather just not play football then play in Miami at QB? Garrard and Delhomme told them to get bent?

Garrard knows that any time behind the Miami line is a death warrant.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 05, 2011, 11:08:08 AM
I go back to my stance that they should just run the Wildcat more.  It'll be fine.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 05, 2011, 11:15:05 AM
I go back to my stance that they should just run the Wildcat more.  It'll be fine.

(http://i124.photobucket.com/albums/p20/n8nate/bookst.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 05, 2011, 11:15:52 AM
Too bad they got rid of all their Wildcat RB's and got Reggie Bush instead.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 05, 2011, 11:19:09 AM
Too bad they got rid of all their Wildcat RB's and got Reggie Bush instead.

Teach him to throw and get him out there. He has to be of SOME use to that offense.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 05, 2011, 11:19:39 AM
I hear he can be an every-down back.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 05, 2011, 11:58:01 AM
Holy shit. How bad does your organization have to look to decide that you'd rather just not play football then play in Miami at QB? Garrard and Delhomme told them to get bent?
They are doing everything they can to get Andrew Luck :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 05, 2011, 12:01:37 PM
The Cruz TD against the Eagles where the two defenders actually tackle each other on the sidelines while Cruz prances by them?

Yeah, that shit won't happen for the Giants when they play the second half of the season. They have games against Buffalo, NE, GB, NO, Washington, Jets, and 2 against Dallas. Going 4-4 in that stretch would be freaking miracle for them.

Not sure why you list Dallas in there twice.  That's not exactly a difficult game there sonny.

I've seen the Giants play in 2 of their games. They lost to the Redskins, their secondary getting mostly owned by... SUPER BOWL QUARTERBACK Rex Grossman. Their victory against the Eagles was due to 2 things as I said: an Eagles secondary that couldn't tackle my dead grandmother in the open field and a defensive line that SHREDDED a really shitty Eagles O line. They required a shitty call by the refs to beat Arizona. And they beat a St. Louis team that is really fucking awful.

Yes, Eli has some good numbers. He's not making the mistakes he normally makes. But he's had some real GIFTS for TD throws. Brandon Jacobs pass for a TD in Philadelphia, two long passes to Cruz in Philly. This Giants team is a lucky 3-1. They aren't as bad as the Niners, but they aren't what I would call good.

I just hear excuses here honestly.  The Giants only won because they beat the other team that day!  But I agree, the Washington game was just awful.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 05, 2011, 12:05:43 PM
I hear he can be an every-down back.

So Wildcat every play then.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Velorath on October 05, 2011, 03:47:51 PM
I've seen the Giants play in 2 of their games. They lost to the Redskins, their secondary getting mostly owned by... SUPER BOWL QUARTERBACK Rex Grossman. Their victory against the Eagles was due to 2 things as I said: an Eagles secondary that couldn't tackle my dead grandmother in the open field and a defensive line that SHREDDED a really shitty Eagles O line. They required a shitty call by the refs to beat Arizona. And they beat a St. Louis team that is really fucking awful.

Yes, Eli has some good numbers. He's not making the mistakes he normally makes. But he's had some real GIFTS for TD throws. Brandon Jacobs pass for a TD in Philadelphia, two long passes to Cruz in Philly. This Giants team is a lucky 3-1. They aren't as bad as the Niners, but they aren't what I would call good.

I just hear excuses here honestly.  The Giants only won because they beat the other team that day!  But I agree, the Washington game was just awful.

I think it's pretty valid when trying to determine how good a 3-1 team really is, to point out that two of those victories were against teams in the NFC West.  In fact the combined record of the three teams the Giants have beaten so far is 2-10.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 05, 2011, 04:01:40 PM
Not sure why you list Dallas in there twice.  That's not exactly a difficult game there sonny.

You split the series last year against Jon Kitna and a shitty, injured 6-10 Dallas team.

But nawwww easy pickings.

Don't let things like actual facts get in the way of your insane ramblings. Giants fans never do.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 05, 2011, 05:18:51 PM
Let's not fight among ourselves, that's what THEY want.  Face it, anyone predictions is suspect right now.  I mean who figured the Lions would be 4-0?  We are only 1/4 into the season, every team can still make the playoffs. 

Except for the Fins, those jagoffs are proper fucked.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 06, 2011, 05:26:46 AM
I think it's pretty valid when trying to determine how good a 3-1 team really is, to point out that two of those victories were against teams in the NFC West.  In fact the combined record of the three teams the Giants have beaten so far is 2-10.

It doesn't really matter.  They will get a chance to prove it on the field soon enough.  I'm not willing to rule the Giants out of anything after their Superbowl run.  Yes, I know much of the team is different, but Eli still can pull some shit out of his ass if given the chance.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 06, 2011, 07:37:54 AM
I will say this about the Giants. Every time I absolutely write them off, they go and do shit like beat the Packers in the NFC Championship IN Lambeau, then go on to beat an undefeated Patriots team to win a goddamn Super Bowl. I picked against them in EVERY SINGLE PLAYOFF GAME that year, even saying they'd not make the playoffs, and they fucking did.

Of course, that team had more talent and fewer injuries, so /shrug. I still think they are a bad team with their wins coming over either bad teams or good teams on really bad streaks. But if they get to the playoffs while the Eagles and Cowboys languish under .500 in the bottom half of that division, I'll still be happy. I don't actually hate the Giants or Eli, and will root for them on occasion. They are a hard team to root for, though, because they never do what you'd expect, and... well.. Eli face.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 06, 2011, 08:36:44 AM
We will know how good the Giants are by halftime on Sunday. If they aren't beating the shit out of the Seahawks by then, they are a joke.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 06, 2011, 08:38:16 AM
We will know how good the Giants are by halftime on Sunday. If they aren't beating the shit out of the Seahawks by then, they are a joke.

Well, that is for sure.  They will though.  The Seahawks are terrible.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 06, 2011, 10:59:01 AM
Not sure why you list Dallas in there twice.  That's not exactly a difficult game there sonny.

You split the series last year against Jon Kitna and a shitty, injured 6-10 Dallas team.

But nawwww easy pickings.

Don't let things like actual facts get in the way of your insane ramblings. Giants fans never do.

Heh.  Just like all Cowboy fans, your team is amazing, and always will be.  Good thing Romo won you that playoff game a few years ago so that we wouldn't reach that "It's been two decades since you won a playoff game" moment.  You guys should consider yourself lucky I guess. 

Maybe one day you can take down that Troy Aikman poster on your wall and put up another superbowl winning Dallas QB. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 06, 2011, 11:01:22 AM
We will know how good the Giants are by halftime on Sunday. If they aren't beating the shit out of the Seahawks by then, they are a joke.

That doesn't mean anything.  We demolished the Seahawks, I think last year? or two years ago? and then preceded to shit the bed.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on October 06, 2011, 11:34:19 AM
I will say this about the Giants. Every time I absolutely write them off, they go and do shit like beat the Packers in the NFC Championship IN Lambeau, then go on to beat an undefeated Patriots team to win a goddamn Super Bowl. I picked against them in EVERY SINGLE PLAYOFF GAME that year, even saying they'd not make the playoffs, and they fucking did.

Best year ever!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 06, 2011, 12:49:34 PM
Haha.  Hank Williams, Jr. is gone from MNF (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7066449/espn-hank-williams-jr-theme-song-return-monday-night-football).  Talk about bad choices. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 06, 2011, 01:02:11 PM
One down, Jaws and Gruden to go.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 06, 2011, 01:09:20 PM
I think if you removed Gruden, Jaws might be tolerable. But the way those two tag-team knobslobber players just gets IRRITATING. I'd prefer if they got Mike and Mike to do the broadcast with Mike Ditka there for color commentary. That opening day San Fran game they did a few years ago was good.

As for Bocephus,  :facepalm: I love how he bitches about his First Amendment rights being taken away. No, Hank, that's not actually how the First Amendment works. You got to say exactly what you wanted to say. The Government didn't stop you, and the government didn't come after you for saying one of the dumbest things on Earth on national television. Just because you CAN say whatever you want doesn't mean you are immune to the consequences, which in this case meant less royalties for you.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 06, 2011, 01:11:03 PM
He certainly increased his entertainment value with that outburst.   :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 06, 2011, 01:34:52 PM
Haha.  Hank Williams, Jr. is gone from MNF (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7066449/espn-hank-williams-jr-theme-song-return-monday-night-football).  Talk about bad choices. 

I don't know if he was souped up on something of a pharmaceutical nature, or he's just a plain 'ol fashioned doltish moron, but that was a sorrowful exhibit that even left the fox-bots gahing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 06, 2011, 01:58:54 PM
That dude is permanently pickled.  He doesn't need to be souped up for anything crazy to come out of his mouth.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 06, 2011, 03:18:33 PM
I think if you removed Gruden, Jaws might be tolerable. But the way those two tag-team knobslobber players just gets IRRITATING. I'd prefer if they got Mike and Mike to do the broadcast with Mike Ditka there for color commentary. That opening day San Fran game they did a few years ago was good.

As for Bocephus,  :facepalm: I love how he bitches about his First Amendment rights being taken away. No, Hank, that's not actually how the First Amendment works. You got to say exactly what you wanted to say. The Government didn't stop you, and the government didn't come after you for saying one of the dumbest things on Earth on national television. Just because you CAN say whatever you want doesn't mean you are immune to the consequences, which in this case meant less royalties for you.

You're exactly right about Bocephus, but Ditka chops his sentences up too bad when he gets excited. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2011, 07:36:25 AM
When is Ditka NOT excited?  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 07, 2011, 12:44:41 PM
Ah.  That's what it is.  I thought he was just dumb.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 07, 2011, 12:45:37 PM
With Ditka, it's one too many disco biscuits to the head.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Zetleft on October 09, 2011, 01:11:55 PM
We will know how good the Giants are by halftime on Sunday. If they aren't beating the shit out of the Seahawks by then, they are a joke.

Well, that is for sure.  They will though.  The Seahawks are terrible.
:awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 09, 2011, 01:15:14 PM
Oh man!  :awesome_for_real:

After all the shit-talking this week, the G Men laying that egg is just delicious.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 09, 2011, 01:15:52 PM
 :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 09, 2011, 02:11:11 PM
Wow, the Seahawks must think they are a football team or something.  Also glad Philly lost.  WHAR DREAM TEAM WHAR.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Strazos on October 09, 2011, 02:45:34 PM
I hate the Eagles SO MUCH...the sorrow on Facebook is so delicious.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on October 09, 2011, 02:50:57 PM
I hate the Cowboys like all right-thinking Americans, but I really, REALLY fuckin' hate the Eagles. Them losing helps me ignore the Giants being shitty this weekend.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 09, 2011, 03:01:58 PM
I hate the Cowboys like all right-thinking Americans, but I really, REALLY fuckin' hate the Eagles. Them losing helps me ignore the Giants being shitty this weekend.  :oh_i_see:

Best bye week EVAR.  :yahoo:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 09, 2011, 03:09:58 PM
Bucs are self-destructing. What happened to their defense?



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 09, 2011, 03:12:45 PM
Bucs are self-destructing. What happened to their defense?



Jet lag?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 09, 2011, 03:25:42 PM
Playoffs bound.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 09, 2011, 04:16:36 PM
The Tim Tebow era has begun :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 09, 2011, 04:22:17 PM
What, what?  I thought our lord and savior was 3rd string? 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 09, 2011, 04:23:25 PM
The Tim Tebow era has begun :awesome_for_real:


Palm Sunday: The Sequel!

You all know what happens next...

edit: And wtf Indy? Seriously??  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on October 09, 2011, 04:45:33 PM
I hate the Cowboys like all right-thinking Americans, but I really, REALLY fuckin' hate the Eagles. Them losing helps me ignore the Giants being shitty this weekend.  :oh_i_see:

Best bye week EVAR.  :yahoo:

(http://m.nypost.com/;m=is;f=jpg;h=300;k=Y-6qS4_fioNQ6ABsCtWhmw;q=70;w=300/rw/nypost/2011/10/09/sports/web_photos/eli5164047--300x300.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ginaz on October 09, 2011, 05:50:26 PM
Looks like the Bills might be for real this season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 09, 2011, 06:29:57 PM
The Tim Tebow era has begun :awesome_for_real:


He didn't do too badly, all things considered. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on October 09, 2011, 11:37:51 PM
Bwahahaha!  Suck it Giants!

Note to Eagle's opposing teams:  It's fine if you beat them, but please stop intercepting so many Vick passes (especially those pick-sixes).  I don't think you realize that you are adversely impacting his Fantasy production.  Thanks in advance!

Also, I think I can explain the Tampa Bay defensive meltdown.  See, both my Fantasy defenses were on a bye week, so I traded Dallas DEF to specifically grab Tampa.  They were going to play the 49ers after all, and we all know how miserable an offensive unit they are, right?  RIGHT?!

Speaking of Dallas, did Tony Romo manage to do anything stupid during his bye week?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 10, 2011, 06:02:13 AM
Speaking of Dallas, did Tony Romo manage to do anything stupid during his bye week?

No he just got skewered by the press for simply existing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 10, 2011, 07:52:04 AM
What a fucking weekend in the NFL.

All right, Cam Newton is a for real NFL quarterback. I don't have any explanation for it, because I was sure the kid was all hype. But apparently, he really is pretty damn good. I will say the Saints defense isn't great, but he made a game of what I expected would be a blowout. His first pass gets picked and returned almost for a TD, but instead of melting down, he has a decent game with a team that can't really be described as good. If Carolina's defense was halfway decent, this could be a 4-1/3-2 team.

Hey Denver! Welcome to the Vince Young Tim Tebow era! Prepare to suck hard while trying to teach him how now to scramble at every opportunity while he overthrows, underthrows and generally misses throws to two good wide receivers. I feel bad for Kyle Orton. He never gets a fair shake anywhere he goes. I blame their suckiness last year on that overrated hack Josh McDaniels, who is now trying to ruin Sam Bradford's career. I expect Tebow to end like Vince Young. He can win, but no one will be able to figure out how it happens. And he will not be a Super Bowl QB.

Damn Pittsburgh. Save some for next week before the Rapist snaps his ankle off.

Oh Philly fans. How does the reaping taste? Tastes like dead dog stewing in the sun, don't it? How long before you run Vick out of town on a rail? All of us football fans who hated you for signing him are loving this shit right now. Amazing how many INT's $40 million can buy. SUCK IT SUCK IT SUCK IT.

What was that about the Giants? Oh right, THEY SUCK. The Seahawks made you make the Eli face. On a positive note, Victor Cruz may actually be a decent wide receiver.

Green Bay. Goddamn. You found some defense after spotting the Falcons 14 points. I worry a little bit about the tackle situation if Chad Clifton is out for any length of time (Sherrod seems to be struggling a bit and Newhouse isn't a starter), but Rodgers finds a way to win. Starks looks really good as a change-up back for Ryan Grant (and let's face it, Stars will be the starter eventually). This was a tough game. Atlanta needs something. If Julio Jones hamstring is serious, this team is in trouble. They don't seem to have a real grip on what they want to do on offense. Their defense is BAD. They got some decent pass rush against Rodgers when Clifton went down, but their corners are suspect at best, and nothing on the defense scares anybody.

The New York Jets are a team in FREE-FUCKING-FALL. They can't run the ball for shit. I thought it might have just been the lack of Mangold at center last week, but even this week, they couldn't run consistently, or keep any drives alive. They are getting behind and having to rely on Sanchez and he's continually proving what I've always believed about him. He's a game manager at best. He cannot carry a team no matter who he has catching the ball. Without a running game, he's going to fail. They'll be lucky if he throws more TD's than INT's in a season. And yet, I still think they make the playoffs because the AFC is a goddamn wasteland.

San Francisco is suddenly looking like a real team. WTF? They don't even have to be that good to win that division, but they have a defense and Alex Smith is looking like a competent game managing QB. Better hope Frank Gore doesn't go down.

Looking at the playoff picture, New England is a lock, San Diego is almost certain to win that division and nothing else is really clear. Both the Steelers and Ravens are inconsistent, Houston and Tennessee will fight out for that division, and Buffalo and the Jets are second fiddle to the Pats. Those six teams are going to be fighting for 4 playoff spots. As for the NFC, Green Bay and New Orleans are locks. Detroit is likely a wild card and it now looks like San Fran will win that division outright. The East is a fucking mess. Whoever wins that division will be the team that fucks up less, and that could actually be Washington. Whatever happens, the wild card won't come out of the East. It's probably Atlanta or Tampa, depending on which one can solidify their defense quickest.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 10, 2011, 08:16:14 AM
I can't in good faith pick Atlanta as an NFC wild card after going to that Packers game last night. Nobody can win consistently with their trench problems on offense and defense. Matt Ryan is running for his life, and Rodgers might as well have had a lounge chair and an umbrella drink in the pocket.

Anybody who has a sense of these things is jumping off the following bandwagons: Atlanta, NY Jets, St. Louis, and Philly. I don't think any of those teams have a chance at the playoffs.

The following bandwagons are getting new members after this week: Buffalo, Cincy, Lions, and 49ers. All have big upsides in their divisions and legit shots at the playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 10, 2011, 08:28:21 AM
Anybody jumping on the Cincy bandwagon should go jump in front of a bus instead. This is a terrible team with a rookie QB. Granted, he looks to be a good rookie QB and AJ Green might be a good wideout. But this team is going to be a bad team. They beat a BAD Jaguars team, and got lucky against the Bills, who probably aren't as good as everyone wants to make them. The Lions and 49ers I'd agree are legit shots at the playoffs. I still think both Atlanta and the Jets can make the playoffs, but I don't see them getting very far.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 10, 2011, 08:52:57 AM
Cincy's division is highly questionable though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 10, 2011, 09:35:33 AM
Cincy's division is highly questionable though.

I believe it is Baltimore's to lose.

Steelers may well snag a wildcard primarily due to soft 2nd half schedule -- outside of a 2 game stretch where they face off against Baltimore and New England (both at Heinz Field), the rest of the slate is filled with the likes of Jacksonville, St. Louis, Arizona, Cleveland X 2, Cincinnati X 2, Kansas City and San Francisco (visiting, may be tougher matchup than originally envisioned, given the solid start, but I am not convinced yet).

Max Starks, after a season of inactivity, and laying on the couch + 3 days of practice, performs like an O-line star and Ben throws 5 TD passes against what was coming in to the game, one of the top rated defenses in the league. Defense, after looking ragged and tired, plays an exceptional game, even minus Harrison and other starters.

But it a game of emotion and fortunes ebb and flow on a weekly basis. I would not be surprised if Steelers went into Jacksonville next week and flounder miserably against a team that, by all sensibility, they should beat handily.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 10, 2011, 09:49:59 AM
The following bandwagons are getting new members after this week: Buffalo, Cincy, Lions, and 49ers. All have big upsides in their divisions and legit shots at the playoffs.
Niners vs. Lions -- game of the week :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 10, 2011, 10:08:26 AM
I believe Baltimore is too old and their offense is not great.

Pitt probably backdoors that division (Rothlerapist joke) and Cincy gets a wild card going 10-6. I believe they can get 8 wins easily and maybe steal a split against the Ravens or Pitt, then beat either Arizona or Houston.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on October 10, 2011, 10:22:13 AM
Cincy's division is highly questionable though.

Cincy has a habit of losing division games to otherwise shitty teams.  Reference every Cincy vs Browns game of the last 20 years when the Browns were on the bottom and Cincy had a shot at the playoffs.

Ed: Cincy's sole saving grace in this regard might just be how young and new the team is.  No losing mindset has developed yet, which is what has always caused those wonderful 'wtf' moments.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 10, 2011, 11:13:05 AM
I'll just put it this way. If you're ignoring Cincy or writing them off, beware.

#1 in total Defense in the NFL
#5 in opp PPG allowed
2nd least penalized offensive team in the league.
Middle of the pack offense with a very balanced attack, but they have the 40+ yard deep threat.

They are disciplined, good on D, and keep an even turnover margin.

Compare that to Baltimore, who is 3rd in total D, 1st in opp PPG, 5th least penalties, middle of the road offense balanced towards the pass. They are very similar clubs. I think they will play hard against each other in a bloody, defensive matchup.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 10, 2011, 11:23:34 AM
I'll just put it this way. If you're ignoring Cincy or writing them off, beware.

#1 in total Defense in the NFL
#5 in opp PPG allowed
2nd least penalized offensive team in the league.
Middle of the pack offense with a very balanced attack, but they have the 40+ yard deep threat.

They are disciplined, good on D, and keep an even turnover margin.

Compare that to Baltimore, who is 3rd in total D, 1st in opp PPG, 5th least penalties, middle of the road offense balanced towards the pass. They are very similar clubs. I think they will play hard against each other in a bloody, defensive matchup.

They are a team from Ohio and thus will fall flat on their faces when there is something to play for. And fuck Cincinnati - god damn river people.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 10, 2011, 11:39:01 AM
Is it time for a SF-Cincy Super Bowl again?   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 10, 2011, 11:47:34 AM
Next year, perhaps :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 10, 2011, 12:56:17 PM
I believe Baltimore is too old and their offense is not great.

Pitt probably backdoors that division (Rothlerapist joke) and Cincy gets a wild card going 10-6. I believe they can get 8 wins easily and maybe steal a split against the Ravens or Pitt, then beat either Arizona or Houston.

Baltimore's biggest problem is that Joe Flacco is not consistent. When he has a good game, they can romp. When he doesn't, they get games like that Jets game, where their defense can win them the game, but their offense is going to look like shit-covered toast.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 10, 2011, 03:11:56 PM
I don't know how the season will wind up but this is an exciting and fun year thanks to the Lions, 49'ers, Bills, and Cincy.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Velorath on October 10, 2011, 03:15:44 PM
The following bandwagons are getting new members after this week: Buffalo, Cincy, Lions, and 49ers. All have big upsides in their divisions and legit shots at the playoffs.

True Niner fans are too cautiously optimistic to actually ride on the bandwagon for fear that it could collapse and burst into flames at any moment.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 10, 2011, 03:19:47 PM
Well, remember, we can feel pretty comfortable that 8-8 or even 7-9 will get us into the playoffs.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 10, 2011, 04:16:04 PM
Well, remember, we can feel pretty comfortable that 8-8 or even 7-9 will get us into the playoffs the division championship.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on October 10, 2011, 08:08:00 PM
Might as well preemptively throw a flag on every play, just in case.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on October 10, 2011, 09:04:55 PM
Restorin' da roar! 5-0 Lions!

(CHI is BAD)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on October 11, 2011, 05:22:54 AM
Does anyone else find the NFL.com video player sucks balls? I can't watch most of the games due to being a filthy euro, and I used to catch the highlights on the web, but this season the web player seems to be absolute shite.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 11, 2011, 06:02:51 AM
Restorin' da roar! 5-0 Lions!

(CHI is BAD)

Chicago takes the lead and I'm thinking, ok they have a chance even though Cutler is running from guys on every play. Then, Stafford puts the TD in, and I'm thinking maybe they can just stop them and make it a game. Then, Best goes 88 yards for the TD and I turned off the TV.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 11, 2011, 08:26:06 AM
This Chicago team is INCREDIBLY BAD. What did they end up with 7 false starts, with the goddamn TE making 3 of those in the first quarter? I actually felt bad for Cutler and I fucking hate him. He was the only reason that team made any points last night. He was constantly running for his fucking life. I'm not sure he had more than 5 throws where he actually could set himself. The worst part was that most of that pressure came from just 4 down linemen and not even the same down lineman. The offensive tackles were just fucking awful. Hey, dickshits, the guy who just skullfucked your QB? He's standing about 1 foot farther to your side than he normally would, and blowing past you. Do you think you could make the adjustment to realize that he's starting at a different angle and maybe move out there immediately instead of checking inside. And fuck Mike Martz in the goddamn eyeholes. That arrogant son of a whoremonger is sitting up in the booth watching the whole thing and makes no fucking adjustments for it all game. Now, I realize that dropping a FB or a TE into the backfield to fucking block takes away a receiver downfield, and your current crop of shitty wideouts is not good enough to beat single coverage much less the double coverage created by the fact they don't need to blitz linebackers and can put 7 into coverage. But even if it doesn't allow Cutler to do anything more than throw the ball out of bounds, at least he's not getting some 350 pound fucker's helmet in his sternum ON EVERY FUCKING PLAY.

Yeah, that's a shitty O line, but there are plenty of things the coaches can do to mitigate the fact that Cutler is getting MURDERED. There's no excuse for an NFL QB to be chased that badly. And in this case, a good running game wasn't helping - Forte got 22 carries for 116 yards, and it didn't stop the pass rush AT ALL.

That Detroit defensive line is fucking scary. Yes, the Bears O line sucks, but guys like Suh and Avril were just blasting through their blockers, especially on short yardage situations. That first drive where the Bears try to get a first down on 3rd and 1 and 4th and 1 was CRAZY. It's like the blockers weren't even there.

Stafford, Best and Johnson are good, and barring injury, they are going to be good for a long time. You give this team a better O line and a better secondary, maybe a #3 wideout that isn't Nate Burleson, and a short yardage pound-it running back and you will see a team challenging for a Super Bowl spot, not just the playoffs. They are that good together.

Also, Tim Tebow is officially the starter (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7087660/denver-broncos-told-tim-tebow-starting-quarterback-source-says). Good luck with that, Broncos.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 11, 2011, 08:58:45 AM
Tebow actually didn't do too bad in his last half start. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on October 11, 2011, 09:13:12 AM
That Bears game hurt, though at least people are starting to give Cutler a little credit for having the balls to play behind that "line".

Seattle - what the hell? I can't remember the last time I watched a Seattle game all the way through. That game (and the Eli face) reminded me why I love football.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on October 11, 2011, 09:40:07 AM
I've never, in the 25 years or so of watching Lions football, been able to describe them as 'swarming' until now. I was cringing for Cutler every damn play, thinking 'which one of these guys are going to end up murdering him?'

I think that's a pretty fair assessment of the Lions, Haemish.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on October 11, 2011, 09:59:45 AM
I said it after the pre-season game against New England. Detroit's defense (especially the line) is scary.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 11, 2011, 10:00:35 AM
Detroit put together 3 strong first round picks in a row.  Good scouting on their part.  

Cinci: They've played Cleveland, Denver, SF, Buffalo, and Jacksonville.  Any team could put up great defensive numbers against all of those teams with the exception of Buffalo.  While they are better than many expected, we'll see their real value when they get to the latter part of their schedule (three tough opponents in a row weeks 9-11).  


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 11, 2011, 10:03:52 AM
Speaking of Cincy-

I picked up their D to cover a week 5 bye (they were playing Jax, so I knew they wouldn't get 30 pointed, which is negative points). I now have them v Indy and Ravens v Houston. Ravens have been utterly en fuego so far, but Houston is pretty damned good on offense, especially if AJ plays. Thoughts?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: DLRiley on October 11, 2011, 10:16:10 AM
Why do people hate Vick again? I think its pretty tear worthy what happening to him, fuck the eagles though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on October 11, 2011, 10:23:13 AM
Why do people hate Vick again? I think its pretty tear worthy what happening to him, fuck the eagles though.

Taken in it's entirety, I have no idea what your post is saying.

As for the first question, for me I think it's fairly obvious:

(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/20557826/169ss.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 11, 2011, 10:24:42 AM
Why do people hate Vick again?

People love fake thugs.  Sadly, Vick is a real thug. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 11, 2011, 10:39:42 AM
Curtis Painter is a turnover machine for Indy. Houston, without Andre, is not going to fare well one-dimensionally against the best D in the NFL.

I'd go with Baltimore.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 11, 2011, 10:58:21 AM
Detroit put together 3 strong first round picks in a row.  Good scouting on their part.  

Cinci: They've played Cleveland, Denver, SF, Buffalo, and Jacksonville.  Any team could put up great defensive numbers against all of those teams with the exception of Buffalo.  While they are better than many expected, we'll see their real value when they get to the latter part of their schedule (three tough opponents in a row weeks 9-11).  

Any team but the West Coast Killers of Tampa Bay you mean.  :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 11, 2011, 11:00:31 AM
Speaking of Cincy-

I picked up their D to cover a week 5 bye (they were playing Jax, so I knew they wouldn't get 30 pointed, which is negative points). I now have them v Indy and Ravens v Houston. Ravens have been utterly en fuego so far, but Houston is pretty damned good on offense, especially if AJ plays. Thoughts?

Ravens all the way. Sure, Indy will stink but the Ravens will be playing against a Houston offense without Andre Johnson.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 11, 2011, 11:01:07 AM
Two southern minds agree:

Baltimore.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 11, 2011, 04:14:15 PM
You know, I'm on the Cutler bandwagon.  The poor guy ran for his life last night and still made incredible throws.  He has every right to be pissed at that offensive offensive line.  Forte and Hester are the only other two players of worth on that offense.

Now to the Lions.  Haemish has covered it much better than I could but I'd like to say that the Lions are playing with incredible intensity.  Maybe it was due to the awesome crowd, but they were on fire.   


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 11, 2011, 05:51:13 PM
Now to the Lions.  Haemish has covered it much better than I could but I'd like to say that the Lions are playing with incredible intensity.  Maybe it was due to the awesome crowd, but they were on fire.   

You like to see this intensity in a pro team.  You don't get that very often.  They're my team this year.  Bring back Barry!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 11, 2011, 05:56:39 PM
You know, I'm on the Cutler bandwagon.  The poor guy ran for his life last night and still made incredible throws.  He has every right to be pissed at that offensive offensive line.  Forte and Hester are the only other two players of worth on that offense.

Forte yes, Hester only as a return man -- as a receiver, at best, he's average -- too many drops and he really hasn't shined, at least on a consistent basis, as the deep threat every fan conjures him to be. I can think of receivers (2 on the Steelers alone) on just about every other team, except for a handful, that I'd rather have in that role than Hester.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 16, 2011, 01:32:40 PM
Niners, Super Bowl? :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 16, 2011, 05:42:06 PM
Hey Martz see what happens when you give your QB protection? :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 16, 2011, 05:46:16 PM
Glad to see the old Browns are back! WHOO HOOO!!

I'll be back for the draft. :cry:

at least I have LSU...at least till Nov. 5th unless they do something stupid against Auburn....


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 16, 2011, 06:41:17 PM
I actually found myself pulling for the Cowboys.  Disgusting.  They lost, but they looked like a NFL team instead of a drunken prison riot.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 16, 2011, 06:49:45 PM
Glad to see the old Browns are back! WHOO HOOO!!
It seemed like they were in it till the end.

Quote
I'll be back for the draft. :cry:
Your team will need to suck more if they want a chance at Luck.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on October 17, 2011, 02:27:37 AM
Yeah, the Dolphins and Colts are out-sucking the Browns by a wide margin this year.

What the hell, Tampa Bay?  Can the real Buccaneers please stand up?  You get the tar beat out of you by the 49ers, then run Earnest Graham for over 100 yards on the Saints?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 17, 2011, 03:26:07 AM
Grats on the 49'ers but Handshakegate may come back in the playoffs. 

Bucs are a schizo team but do have potential.

WTF Redskins? 

Da Bears find out that if you protect your QB you can win games. 

Jags did have some fight in them after all, but the Steelers win.

I hate the Pats and Boys but that was a good football game.  The Pats are so polished. 

Fins and Jets tonight!  I'm so...pumped?  Sexy Rexy and the Jets need a cupcake team and dolphins are the politest of the mammals.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on October 17, 2011, 05:57:56 AM
Fins and Jets tonight!  I'm so...pumped?  Sexy Rexy and the Jets need a cupcake team and dolphins are the politest of the mammals.


I'm sorry, but no. Ex Ryan can not have that nickname while Grossman is still (for now) playing in the league.

How good is Devin Hester? So good, he scares the punter in to punting for 17 yards.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 17, 2011, 06:29:00 AM
I loved Harbaugh's hemming and hawing when asked what the discussion was between them.  He clearly said something nasty because he didn't have a good answer.  I love drama like this in sports.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 17, 2011, 08:56:49 AM
Schwartz is an idiot and even bigger hot-head than Harbaugh is. If Harbaugh did swear at him it's because Schwartz said something to him after Harbaugh's slap on the back turned into a partial shove because of the way they were moving past each other.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 17, 2011, 08:58:51 AM
Oh yeah.  Schwartz is fucking nutso and probably instigated the whole thing.  Harbaugh runs his mouth too though.   I can't get enough of this.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: tazelbain on October 17, 2011, 09:02:24 AM
I think Harbaugh's hemming was him trying to be magnanimous and not escalate ling things further.  I know I would be saying something like "grow a sack" in his place.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 17, 2011, 09:05:46 AM
Maybe so.  I wish he would pull the trigger on that shit.  I think both of them are good coaches and I love a fiery personality in sports. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 17, 2011, 09:59:12 AM
Bah, I hate that all the talk is about the goddamn handshake turned shoving match, and not about a really good game. San Fran is a much better team than I thought they were, and it's all about the defense. I can't really think of one standout player on that team's defense, but they work very well together. That Tampa game wasn't a fluke, that defense is just that good. Also, New Orleans defense is that porous - they made Tampa look good. Alex Smith wasn't and never will be spectacular, but they run the offense he can succeed with.

Also, yeah, Mike Martz needs to be beaten with truncheons. If it had been last week, the Vikings would have floored Cutler. How long will it be before Martz is back to his old QB-killing ways?

That Buffalo-Giants game was a good one. The Giants actually looked good, which means within 2 weeks, they'll lay another egg.

And there's the Rex Grossman we know and love. 4 INT's and benched. Yep, that's him. SUPER BOWL QUARTERBACK REX GROSSMAN! Even so, the Iggles still tried their best to lose the game.

If the Jets don't absolutely hammer the Dolphins tonight, I will seriously doubt their ability to make the playoffs.

The Bengals are not a 4-2 team. The Raiders lost their QB but it won't matter, as they didn't need him to be spectacular anyway. The Texans are trying their best to ignore the gift horse Peyton Manning's neck has given them. The Cowboys still suck, but they sucked less.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 17, 2011, 10:05:47 AM
Of the games I saw, the Falcons are probably the worst 3-3 team I've seen all year. They have absolutely nothing going for them on either line, still. Even against a shitty defense, they could barely put the game away if it wasn't for Cam throwing a late pick.

Sexy Rexy may want to polish his sales skills.

The Giants still continue to boggle the mind. They are an 9-7 team in my view simple because they can't figure out who they are.

Chicago laid the wood to the Vikings. At one point, Hester returned a kick after his return TD, got pissed he didn't bust another one, and the announcers chuckled that they were toying with the Vikings.

Yall still don't believe me that the Cowboys and Bengals are playoff bound, but I think they are. The defenses are really good. This year, I don't think you're going to find a team in the playoffs with a shitty defense except for the Pats, and they are going to get busted out early.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 17, 2011, 11:02:18 AM
San Fran is a much better team than I thought they were, and it's all about the defense.


Harbaugh is a really good coach.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 17, 2011, 11:03:38 AM
Niners, Super Bowl? :awesome_for_real:


Niners vs. Raiders  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 17, 2011, 11:07:00 AM
The only good team the Bengals have beaten this year is Buffalo. They still have 2 games against Pittsburgh and 2 against Baltimore, all of which I expect them to lose. Houston should beat them as well as Tennessee. That makes 8 losses. Yes, there defense is better than it should be. They might even win their home games against the Steelers and Ravens. I don't see the rest of the AFC taking that much of a dump that the let the Bungles in. The Raiders, Bills, Titans and (if they don't lose tonight) Jets are all contenders for the 2 wild card spots, and all of those teams are better teams.

The Cowboys, though? Even in that weird ass NFC East, I don't see them making the playoffs at all. To quote Jim Mora, PLAYOFFS? Although to be fair, their schedule is much more favorable than the Bengals, considering how inconsistent every other team in their division is. We know one wild card is likely coming out of the North (the Lions or Green Bay). New Orleans, Tampa and Atlanta will be fighting for both the NFC South and that other wild card spot, as will every team in the East. I don't see it.

Unfortunately, with the whack ass way some of the teams like the Jets, Eagles and Falcons are playing this year, who the fuck knows? The Eagles could WIN the goddamn East.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 17, 2011, 11:13:43 AM
I still expect to see the Cowboys in the playoffs.  I think they'll pull it together.  I have to say that Romo looks completely shaken.  He had a bad look on his face this weekend versus the Pats, even though he played a decent game.  He has no confidence.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 17, 2011, 11:55:15 AM
New Orleans, Tampa and Atlanta will be fighting for both the NFC South and that other wild card spot, as will every team in the East. I don't see it.

Unfortunately, with the whack ass way some of the teams like the Jets, Eagles and Falcons are playing this year, who the fuck knows? The Eagles could WIN the goddamn East.

The Falcons aren't going to compete. That Falcons team does nothing well period. They are a mediocre collection of guys lead by a mediocre QB. 8-8 team at best. Tampa is the same thing, except their QB is younger and has more upside. However, they are middle of the pack running and passing, and their defense fucking blows. I think Chicago can beat them next week.

The Giants are the literal wild card in the NFC. Playing well? 11-5 team. Manning face? 7-9. And anything in between. I think the Cowboys are a 10-6 squad if they beat the Giants at home. If they lose both, Giants win the division and the Cowboys miss the playoffs. One Wild Card is coming out of the North this year. The other isn't going to matter.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Velorath on October 17, 2011, 12:00:48 PM
San Fran is a much better team than I thought they were, and it's all about the defense.


Harbaugh is a really good coach.

Yeah, I think they've actually had a pretty good defense for a while now although they've struggled against the pass at times, and in particular had a bad habit of letting teams convert 3rd and long situations.  I think what makes the defense that much better this year is that the offense is actually able to put together drives now so the defense isn't stuck on the field for three quarters of the game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 17, 2011, 12:39:59 PM
And he's gotten Alex Smith's head out of his ass. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 17, 2011, 12:51:45 PM
49ers are definitely for real. And you have to admit, coaching must be a big part of it, because the nucleus of the team is the same as what they had last year.

Tampa Bay still looks solid, despite the meltdown v. 49ers the previous week. Freeman, IMV, is a poor-man version of Roethlisberger, but the big difference is, his coach treats him more like he's Rex Grossman. Which is why, they get down a couple of scores, he's just not equipped to perform in such a scenario.

Steelers should be embarrassed for their performance in squeaking out a win at home against Jaguars. They dominated 1st half, then took a catnap in the 2nd half. And awful Ben reared his impish head, missing open receivers all day (though it was a gusty day). I would not be surprised if next week, they tank in Arizona.

It's not inconceivable that Packers could easily go 16-0. Yeah, they have a home & away with Detroit, a home game with Tampa Bay that could go awry and at San Diego, which I think they will romp because Norv's reign of success, I believe, is over. I do not see any other team on that schedule that could possibly dent their run.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: murdoc on October 17, 2011, 01:21:36 PM

Tampa Bay still looks solid, despite the meltdown v. 49ers the previous week. Freeman, IMV, is a poor-man version of Roethlisberger, but the big difference is, his coach treats him more like he's Rex Grossman. Which is why, they get down a couple of scores, he's just not equipped to perform in such a scenario.


Huh? Freeman already has 9 fourth quarter comebacks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 17, 2011, 01:29:25 PM
I'm not so concerned about the Detroit games for the Packers. They will probably lose the game at Ford Field on Thanksgiving, but get the Lions outdoors in the later season and the weather could affect that team. Best will be slowed up by not playing on turf and the passing game could be dampened. Tampa's defense can be tough, but it'll be on their offense as to whether they can hold the ball long enough to not tire out the defense.  The San Diego game may also be a tough one. It's hard to get a read on how good the Chargers really are. Their wins have all been over really crappy teams, but the margins of victory weren't great either. I don't think the Packers will go undefeated, but they won't lose more than 4 games unless there's a serious dip in form.

Also, Brandon Lloyd gets traded to the St. Louis Rams for jack and shit (http://sports.yahoo.com/fantasy/blog/roto_arcade/post/Trade-Spin-Brandon-Lloyd-meet-me-in-St-Louis;_ylt=ArxwnJQUQZQz_AcTaYpyfAi5bZ8u?urn=fantasy-wp10066). A 6th rounder (5th if he catches more than 30 passes) for a guy that went over 1000 receiving yards last year. It's actually a good deal for Lloyd - he gets to avoid watching Tebow short arm throws into the dirt in front of him, goes to a team where he'll easily be the best wideout and it's under Josh McDaniels who apparently gets good results out of him. Of course, the Rams can't score because of the shitty protection Bradford is getting in this scheme but this might help.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 17, 2011, 02:36:23 PM
Bah, I hate that all the talk is about the goddamn handshake turned shoving match, and not about a really good game. San Fran is a much better team than I thought they were, and it's all about the defense. I can't really think of one standout player on that team's defense, but they work very well together.
That would be Patrick Willis who has lead the league in tackles in 2 of his first 4 years. This year however he's splitting those chances with NaVorro Bowman, the other Niner inside linebacker, who actually leads the Niners in tackles.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 17, 2011, 03:25:38 PM
Thanksgiving is going to be epic this year. GB v. Detroit, Dallas probably fighting for it's life against Miami, and a surprisingly good SF team against the Ravens. All in a row. Glorious!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 17, 2011, 03:49:35 PM

Tampa Bay still looks solid, despite the meltdown v. 49ers the previous week. Freeman, IMV, is a poor-man version of Roethlisberger, but the big difference is, his coach treats him more like he's Rex Grossman. Which is why, they get down a couple of scores, he's just not equipped to perform in such a scenario.


Huh? Freeman already has 9 fourth quarter comebacks.

How many of those were against top playoff-caliber squads?

I've noticed when the Buccaneers play against a quality opponent (BAL, PIT last year, DET, SF this year), coach play calling is akin to just like having a Rex Grossman or Josh McCown at QB. They get in a hole early and do not bounce back, like they have done this year against the subpar teams like MIN, IND and even ATL (yes, ATL has been at best, a mediocre squad in 2011).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 17, 2011, 08:13:30 PM
Miami is a total dumpster fire. They walk out on every field they play on with a gas can and oily rags.

They need to blow up everything, starting with the dumbass GM who thought this collection of chuckleheads might win in the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 17, 2011, 10:06:09 PM
Miami is a total dumpster fire. They walk out on every field they play on with a gas can and oily rags.

They need to blow up everything, starting with the dumbass GM who thought this collection of chuckleheads might win in the NFL.

A quarter of the teams in the league have 0 or 1 W. Dolphins, Colts and Rams in the running for 0-16. And Miami might be the worst of this bunch -- how Sparano exists as a NFL head coach, I dunno. But, yeah, GM shares a hefty share of culpability too.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 17, 2011, 10:35:59 PM
Miami is a total dumpster fire. They walk out on every field they play on with a gas can and oily rags.

They need to blow up everything, starting with the dumbass GM who thought this collection of chuckleheads might win in the NFL.
The Dolphins were 7 - 9 last year and had a decent defense. If they didn't suck so much playing at home they might have had a winning record as they were amazing on the road (6 - 1). It wasn't entirely unreasonable to have expected them to improve even if only slightly over last year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on October 17, 2011, 10:54:32 PM
I just don't see much talent on that team.  Their best offensive player leads the league in drops.  :awesome_for_real: Curse of the Welker.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on October 18, 2011, 12:40:36 AM
I won't quote anyone specific, but you Cowboys fans are hilarious.  Playoffs?  Only chance they have of that is by winning their division, and I don't see that happening.  I don't see more than six wins remaining on their schedule, and it could easily end up being fewer.  I'll admit that it is hard to figure out who the best team in the east is right now, but it sure as shit can't be the Cowboys, and thank goodness for that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 18, 2011, 04:44:22 AM
I would say the Cowboys have the softest schedule remaining and the Giants have hardest. That's what gives Cowboys fans hope.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on October 18, 2011, 06:21:54 AM
I'm actually still thinking that Philadelphia will finish ahead of Dallas.  But then, it isn't possible for me to like the Cowboys less than I do, so this may be wishful thinking on my part.  Honestly, though, trying to be objective, I have them finishing around 8 and 8.  9 and 7 is possible, but no fucking way that gets them to the playoffs this year, unless that wins them the division.  Which I doubt.  Somebody in that gaggle-fuck will pull out a 10 and 6.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 18, 2011, 07:10:22 AM
Don't lump me in with the Cowboys fans.  I don't like them at all.  I still think they've got a good shot at the playoffs as the NFC East blows monkey dicks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 18, 2011, 07:35:15 AM
I won't quote anyone specific, but you Cowboys fans are hilarious.  Playoffs?  Only chance they have of that is by winning their division, and I don't see that happening.  I don't see more than six wins remaining on their schedule, and it could easily end up being fewer.  I'll admit that it is hard to figure out who the best team in the east is right now, but it sure as shit can't be the Cowboys, and thank goodness for that.

I think your impressions of the team may be coloring the reality of the East. It's in bad shape. For starters, the Cowboys play STL, MIA, ARI, and SEA, most of those at home. Those four teams have three total wins so far. So yeah, they should be at six wins after that relatively easy. Now, for the remaining games: I need them to go 4-3 to get to 10-6. Most of them are divisional games. 2 Philly, 2 Giants, 1 Skins, and then Buffalo and TB. Let's do a quick breakdown at those matchups.

In Total Offense: Philly is 3, Dallas is 7, Giants are 12, Skins are 17. What's the breakdown though?
Passing: Dallas is the strongest, followed by NY, then Philly, then the Skins. However, in rushing it's the Eagles at #1 and then everyone else in the division sucks.
The matchup that matters is that the Cowboys have the #1 Defense against the run, and that's Philly's main strength. I believe they can win both of those games.

Win the 2 against Philly, beat the Skins again because they suck, and all you have to do is find a win in four games against the Giants, TB, or Buffalo


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 18, 2011, 07:40:18 AM
Seems so easy when you put it that way.  Maybe you should roadmap them to the Superbowl too.  Might as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 18, 2011, 08:38:39 AM
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7118158/oakland-raiders-verge-getting-carson-palmer-cincinnati-bengals-sources-say

Palmer to Oakland... I strangely want to see the Silver and Black with the Lombardi this year now...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on October 18, 2011, 09:07:35 AM
Glad to see the old Browns are back! WHOO HOOO!!
It seemed like they were in it till the end.

That would be why they're the old Browns.  Look like they're winning right up until they don't.   I remember the heartache well from the high school days.  There's a reason they were called the cardiac kids.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7118158/oakland-raiders-verge-getting-carson-palmer-cincinnati-bengals-sources-say

Palmer to Oakland... I strangely want to see the Silver and Black with the Lombardi this year now...

There was much laughter around the office over this earlier today.  It's a great trade for Cinci since he wasn't ever going to play here again. There was also still some question about his thumb and accuracy after last season.  However, I expect like Kitna he'll do ok once he's away from Mikey B.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 18, 2011, 09:17:35 AM
Palmer's ability has been greatly overrated. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on October 18, 2011, 09:21:31 AM
I'ts unlikely he's worth the two #1s Cincy is reportedly getting for him.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 18, 2011, 09:36:26 AM
Palmer's ability has been greatly overrated.  
It wasn't overrated before he got his injuries. Now the Raiders are praying he's the second coming of Jim Plunkett and can resurrect his career by reuniting him with a coach he worked with during his best years in Cincinnati.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 18, 2011, 09:48:02 AM
It wasn't overrated before he got his injuries. Now the Raiders are praying he's the second coming of Jim Plunkett and can resurrect his career by reuniting him with a coach he worked with during his best years in Cincinnati.


Overrated before his injuries really doesn't mean much when you are trading 2 first rounders for a guy.  He's been very average for all of his career except for his second year when he was stellar. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 18, 2011, 09:54:40 AM
Miami is a total dumpster fire. They walk out on every field they play on with a gas can and oily rags.

They need to blow up everything, starting with the dumbass GM who thought this collection of chuckleheads might win in the NFL.
The Dolphins were 7 - 9 last year and had a decent defense. If they didn't suck so much playing at home they might have had a winning record as they were amazing on the road (6 - 1). It wasn't entirely unreasonable to have expected them to improve even if only slightly over last year.


It was when you shitcan your entire offensive system of run first and install some weirdo pass first system, getting rid of two of your best players in the process. Oh and putting it all on a QB with barely one season of starts under his belt, who most folks don't feel is even qualified to start in the NFL on a GOOD team. The GM either had that idea or didn't slap the shit out of the coach who had the idea, and both deserved to be fired for it. Reggie Bush an every down back? Chad Henne a pass-heavy starter? These are things any jackoff who's watched the NFL for the last two years know are stupid, yet these twats got paid big money to do these things. At least the Colts have an excuse for their suckiness. They've been so reliant on a Hall of Fame QB they didn't realize the team around him was middle of the road at best.

EDIT: Two first-rounders is steep, but let's face it, it will instantly improve the Raiders. Even at his worst, Palmer is an upgrade over Jason Campbell. And if your other option is Kyle Boller or Terrelle Pryor, fuck it, Palmer is HOF caliber.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 18, 2011, 10:06:53 AM
Palmer obviously has a lot of potential.  It's a risky move, but one that could pay off in spades for them.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 18, 2011, 10:32:54 AM
He is still young enough to help them for several years. I don't think he is HoF material, but he is a solid starting QB, and a giant upgrade over Campbell and the collection of sewage that was backing Campbell up. Raiders are a running and defense team, so all they really need from Palmer is for him to not actively fuck things up and hit an occasional open receiver. That snapping sound you heard was Norv Turner's sphincter- San Diego can't like this trade AT ALL.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 18, 2011, 10:39:35 AM
I'ts unlikely he's worth the two #1s Cincy is reportedly getting for him.

An insane price, and a coup of a trade for the Bengals.

Carson Palmer has had 2 great seasons in his career, and one of them was at USC.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 18, 2011, 10:52:22 AM
I'ts unlikely he's worth the two #1s Cincy is reportedly getting for him.

An insane price, and a coup of a trade for the Bengals.

Carson Palmer has had 2 great seasons in his career, and one of them was at USC.

Oakland already has the best running game in the AFC. Adding Palmer takes them from one-dimensional to a play-action threat with Moore and Heyward-Bey. They need more offense, because they defense is just slightly above comatose.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 18, 2011, 10:57:20 AM
They gave up way too much.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 18, 2011, 11:01:04 AM
They gave up way too much.

If they can win the division, that first round pick isn't that great.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 18, 2011, 11:12:24 AM
Wasn't the trade a 1st and a 2nd with a condition to be a 1st?  I wonder what the condition is.  (Did not click on link)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on October 18, 2011, 11:16:17 AM
Palmer's performance.

I think this is a dumb trade, but whatever.  Good chance the Raiders would completely blow the pick anyways.  :awesome_for_real:

edit: Trippy's right.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 18, 2011, 11:16:32 AM
Wasn't the trade a 1st and a 2nd with a condition to be a 1st?  I wonder what the condition is.  (Did not click on link)
Playoff win.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 18, 2011, 11:17:25 AM
They gave up way too much.

If they can win the division, that first round pick isn't that great.

Raiders are already missing a lot of picks, 2 early picks for a broken down old QB? They are seriously mortgaging the future here for a guy who I suspect won't end up being any better than freely available guys like David Garrard.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 18, 2011, 11:18:12 AM
Who is having back surgery.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 18, 2011, 11:56:47 AM
You guys are forgetting that this is the Bengals.  They could fuck up a wet dream.

Also, I bet that Palmer blows his ACL in the first game.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 18, 2011, 12:08:11 PM
You guys are forgetting that this is the Bengals.  They could fuck up a wet dream.
True though their last two first round picks -- AJ Green and Jermaine Gresham -- are doing fine so far.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 18, 2011, 01:11:30 PM
Cincy gets a goddamn king's ransom for a guy they weren't playing anyway, AND they get rid of a huge salary cap hit and a contract they didn't think they could trade. The Raiders are getting RAPED on the deal, whether they have to give up a 2nd rounder or a 1st for that 2nd pick. BUT... Palmer is a cut above anyone available otherwise. Garrard is having back surgery, so is likely to be on no one's roster this year. Is there anyone else out there available with as many NFL starts and wins as Palmer? Other than him, you'd looking at trying to trade for a backup like Kitna, or some scrub like Josh McCown or Donovan McNabb.  :awesome_for_real: Like I said, he's a serious upgrade to their backups and the guy they just lost for the season, and is better than any other available option I can think of. When you're desperate, you have to give up more than you'd like. Palmer's probably worth a 3rd rounder at best, but beggar's can't be choosers and Mike Brown has shown he had no interest in trading Palmer for fair value.

Frankly, I'd have rather seen Palmer sit the whole year just so Mike Brown would have to pay him for bupkiss, but I hate Mike Brown like that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 18, 2011, 01:19:27 PM
Also- David Garrard has never been anything even resembling mediocre. He is terrible.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 18, 2011, 01:25:19 PM
I didn't know about the back surgery, so yeah. The 'free' part is important though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 18, 2011, 01:25:58 PM
It's the AFC West, as well. Palmer can dominate out there if the defense can hold teams to under 21 points. I looked at their schedule. They can go 9-7 just by showing up against some of those pitiful teams.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 18, 2011, 04:13:37 PM
Also- David Garrard has never been anything even resembling mediocre. He is terrible.

I disagree. If you look at his numbers, he's actually very accurate. His best year, he threw like 21 TD to 6 INT's and the Jags got to the playoffs. He's not a great QB by any stretch of the imagination, and he can't carry a team. But he can get a team with a decent running game to the playoffs. He may not win many games on his own, but he won't lose many by throwing a shitload of picks. And again, he'd be a huge upgrade over Kyle 56% completion percentage Boller.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 18, 2011, 06:01:53 PM
It's the AFC West, as well. Palmer can dominate out there if the defense can hold teams to under 21 points. I looked at their schedule. They can go 9-7 just by showing up against some of those pitiful teams.

If they don't get to a Super Bowl in the next 2 years the trade was a waste. Palmer is aging, they mortgaged their future even more than it already was, etc.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 18, 2011, 06:28:11 PM
The more important question is will the Raiders bring in Terrell Owens* for Palmer to throw to? :awesome_for_real:

* oddly enough TJ Houshmandzadeh is available too and Palmer has been working out with both of them


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on October 18, 2011, 11:04:14 PM
The price is steep, and I can't help but want to mock it...but I can't really, because I was sorta hoping that Seattle would make a move for him.  I mean, we've got Tavaris Jackson.  It would be worth giving up a 1st round pick just to remove his stench.

So, picks schmicks.  I think it was good for the Raiders.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on October 19, 2011, 04:30:14 AM
Sentiment here this morning continues to be "ha, poor Raiders."  and "Mike Brown still manages to fall in shit and come out smelling like a rose."

Palmer doesn't leave behind any love in the town.  Most folks seem to have just made-up total fantasy worlds around him.  The last call I heard on the radio was noting his QB rating after his knee injury was 30, his completion % has been poor and he can't move anymore.   Quite a contrast from the stats I saw quoted in the Boston Globe when I googled.
Quote
Over the past two years, Palmer completed 61.2 percent of his passes for 7,064 yards, 47 touchdowns, 33 interceptions and a passer rating of 82.9.

He HAS been intercepted a bunch (something like 53 in the last 52 games) so accuracy might be an issue.  There had been rumors he was butting-heads with the 'stars' like TO and 85, though.  He got along well with Housh by all accounts, though.

Snarkiest comment has been, "It's nice to have Dalton in there because we're seeing passes longer than 8yds when we need 10."


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 19, 2011, 06:21:14 AM
I really think people have a bizzarro view of what Palmer is as well. I believe he's walking into an ideal situation in Oakland. Cincy is THE clusterfuck organization of the NFL. Now that Al is dead and buried, Oakland has a chance at being good again in a division that frankly sucks. As much as people like to say that it's a passing league, if you don't have a running game at all, you get eaten alive by opposing defenses when they don't respect the playaction or delayed handoff.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 19, 2011, 07:14:03 AM
Cincinnatti usually drafts pretty well.  I'm not sure the Raiders have as much success, and they will always be stung by the Jamarcus Russel pick.  I say it's a win-win at this point.  Draft picks in the NFL can be pretty dicey.  I would definitely take the known commodity in the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 19, 2011, 07:33:34 AM
Cincinnatti usually drafts pretty well.  I'm not sure the Raiders have as much success, and they will always be stung by the Jamarcus Russel pick.  I say it's a win-win at this point.  Draft picks in the NFL can be pretty dicey.  I would definitely take the known commodity in the NFL.

I would not take a 31 year old Carson Palmer for 1 (and maybe 2) first round pick(s).  Ever. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 19, 2011, 07:38:34 AM
Palmer being able to playaction to Darren McFadden, with speedy wideouts on the edges? He ought to be able to THRIVE in that. And the Oakland offensive line is decent - they've only given up 7 sacks all season, tied for fewest sacks in the league with Buffalo and Tennessee. He's a career 62% completion percentage QB with avg. per pass of 7.1 (not great, not bad). I think he instantly makes that team a playoff team, and they will challenge a possibly soft San Diego team for that division. KC and Denver better get into rebuilding mode.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 19, 2011, 07:58:54 AM
Cincinnatti usually drafts pretty well.  I'm not sure the Raiders have as much success, and they will always be stung by the Jamarcus Russel pick.  I say it's a win-win at this point.  Draft picks in the NFL can be pretty dicey.  I would definitely take the known commodity in the NFL.

I would not take a 31 year old Carson Palmer for 1 (and maybe 2) first round pick(s).  Ever. 

The alternative is to take your first chance at a really good season since Rich Gannon left and flush it down the toilet.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 19, 2011, 08:30:02 AM
Yeah, again, I cannot stress enough... KYLE BOLLER.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on October 19, 2011, 08:50:09 AM
Yeah, again, I cannot stress enough... KYLE BOLLER.

Kyle is awesome!  If you like watching someone trip over his own feet at the mere through that he might get hit that is.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 19, 2011, 09:02:28 AM
The alternative is to take your first chance at a really good season since Rich Gannon left and flush it down the toilet.

How far do you think Palmer can take them realistically?  In my mind, anything short of playing in the Super Bowl makes this a bad trade... and I don't see them making it to the Super Bowl.  

I'd love to be wrong.  I love a good Cinderella story.  I just don't see it happening.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on October 19, 2011, 09:11:07 AM
They won't win a Super Bowl anyways and Oakland just trashed their future for a guy that most likely won't pan out.  I don't think he'll be a success.  I don't think they'll win enough games to justify this expense.  This was a dumb, dumb, dumb trade.  A one and a two (possibly 2 ones) for a guy that would have gone for a fifth rounder if the owner wasn't a dick?  Yikes.

Cincy won with this.  They won hard. Oakland needs a miracle for this to be even slightly worth it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 19, 2011, 10:34:52 AM
Late first round picks are a coin flip at best. Win now, get to the playoffs now, and give yourself a shot.

You can't play "for the future" when you have no QB and are 4-2.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 19, 2011, 11:08:00 AM
I don't think Palmer takes them to the Super Bowl, but I don't think anyone short of Brady, Rodgers or Manning could have. This isn't a great team by any stretch of the imagination. It's got some building blocks, it's owner is finally not crazy (well, we think... remains to be seen if the younger is as crazy as the elder), and it's in a division with two teams that are going nowhere and another team with great talent coached by Norv Turner. But after a decade of sucking so hard, the black on their uniforms was the color of the void in space occupied by the team, playoffs are a goddamn triumph. In order for it to be 2 #1's, Palmer has to lead them to the Super Bowl in the next two years.

Oakland obviously got traderaped. Cincy won and won hard. Of course, whichever team gets to the playoffs this year is the real winner. Carson will be motivated to stick it to Mike Brown, and with the records as they are, these two will likely be up against each other for that last wild card spot.

What were some of the other options?

Kyle Orton - he'd probably have been a better option but Denver would have been crazy to trade him. After all, when Tim Tebow steps on his dick, that'd leave Brady Quinn as your only option.
Vince Young - Purple Drank probably killed any chance of this happening, since Russell and Young are similar style players. And Young would never have been able to handle Raider nation emotionally.
Josh McCown - Might as well go with Kyle Boller.
Matt Leinart - I kid.  :oh_i_see:
David Carr - He just got sacked again.
David Garrard - Back Surgery.
Byron Leftwich - Got replaced by David Garrard.
Derek Anderson - He just got intercepted again... from the bench.
Charlie Whitehurst - YEAH BABY!!!!
Rex Grossman - My dead grandmother just took him for a pick 6.

Now that I think about it, for the price they were willing to pay, they should have called Green Bay about Matt Flynn. He almost beat the Patriots and that was without any sort of running game, is young and seems to have talent. Green Bay would have gladly traded for more draft picks, as they like to build young. It probably wouldn't have even cost them more than a 3rd or 2nd rounder.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on October 19, 2011, 11:18:14 AM
Now that I think about it, for the price they were willing to pay, they should have called Green Bay about Matt Flynn. He almost beat the Patriots and that was without any sort of running game, is young and seems to have talent. Green Bay would have gladly traded for more draft picks, as they like to build young. It probably wouldn't have even cost them more than a 3rd or 2nd rounder.

No one trades Green Bay for backup QBs, they wait until they become free agents, sign them, and then have them become franchise QBs. And I doubt anyone would want to give the Packers any kind of advantage going forward in the draft. They seem to do better in the draft than any team since they learned their lesson with Tony Mandarich.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 19, 2011, 11:23:00 AM
Seattle traded for Hasselbeck.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on October 19, 2011, 11:27:35 AM
Seattle traded for Hasselbeck.

Bah thought he was a free-agent.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 19, 2011, 11:27:46 AM
I bet the vikings would trade McNabb for two 1st round picks.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 19, 2011, 11:42:27 AM
I honestly can't believe you people value first round picks so much that a guy has to be worth a super bowl to get them.

Come on.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 19, 2011, 11:47:22 AM
I honestly can't believe you people value first round picks so much that a guy has to be worth a super bowl to get them.

Come on.

I'd say in addition to this, the chances of a pick working out are the same as Palmer working out for the Raiders. Besides, 2013's draft is going to be chock full of throwing arms coming out of the Pac12 and SEC. Hell throw the ACC in there also. So really, I think it's more a wash than anything.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 19, 2011, 11:52:06 AM
I honestly can't believe you people value first round picks so much that a guy has to be worth a super bowl to get them.

Come on.

I'd say in addition to this, the chances of a pick working out are the same as Palmer working out for the Raiders. Besides, 2013's draft is going to be chock full of throwing arms coming out of the Pac12 and SEC. Hell throw the ACC in there also. So really, I think it's more a wash than anything.

The players they'd pick up with those picks would not be costing them ~40 million guaranteed through 2014, first of all. That's cap money that could go to other use, so treating this like the picks are the only cost of getting the guy is looking at it all wrong. Second of all, this is a player with a very short shelf life at this point. If you pay a high price for a player with a very short shelf life, you are putting all your eggs in the Super Bowl basket. If they don't get there with Palmer as the QB, it was absolutely a waste.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 19, 2011, 12:05:13 PM
As opposed to what? Fading into obscurity again? Riding out the draft picks again for a QB?

There hasn't been a good playoff QB in the first round since Aaron Rodgers in 05. They have a runningback, they have a great offensive line. You get nowhere without having a guy back there that can throw, and getting into the playoffs for the first time in almost a decade makes that worth something.

The Raiders need to establish a new image. They need to show they can compete. They need to do it now while the spotlight is on the team so they can build up excitiment. They need to be a place that free agents look at and think, DAMN, that's a team I could go to and have a shot at postseason success and exposure.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 19, 2011, 12:10:33 PM
And when Palmer gets injured some time in the first 3 games, they're going to look at a team with no QB and no draft picks and think "yeah... I'm avoiding that one."


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 19, 2011, 12:26:52 PM
And when Palmer gets injured some time in the first 3 games, they're going to look at a team with no QB and no draft picks and think "yeah... I'm avoiding that one."

What magic formula leads you to think he's getting injured all of a sudden? He played 16 games in 2009 and 2010 for the shittiest club in the land and managed to survive.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 19, 2011, 12:32:38 PM
Yeah, look at the Raiders passing stats. 7 total sacks in 6 games. Campbell wasn't getting pounded like Romo or Cutler. Palmer won't be asked to drop back 40 or 50 times a game just to have a chance to win. He's got a running game that he didn't have in Cincy. Campbell averaged 25 pass attempts per game last year, 27.5 this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 19, 2011, 12:32:44 PM
1) He's supremely immobile since his knee injury, and will have a hard time getting away from guys.
2) He had no training camp, no practices with an NFL team, etc. He's not going to be anywhere near in football shape in terms of reacting to a pass rush, etc.
3) He's getting older. Older players get hurt more.

I just think there's incredible potential for him to get nailed early on. If he makes it through a few games his odds are a lot better from that point forward though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 19, 2011, 12:44:28 PM
1) He's supremely immobile since his knee injury, and will have a hard time getting away from guys.
He's not *that* immobile. True he can't really run the ball anymore but he was still able to move around in the pocket after his injury. There are plenty of other immobile quarterbacks like Peyton and Eli Manning and Phillip Rivers that do fine (or did in the case of Peyton :awesome_for_real:)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 19, 2011, 12:59:13 PM
Plus, his first game is going to be against KC. He's going to come in there, hand off the ball, and maybe throw a few screens and out routes. They aren't going to need to go deep into the playbook against the Chiefs.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 19, 2011, 02:27:17 PM
As opposed to what? Fading into obscurity again? Riding out the draft picks again for a QB?

I think we're just disagreeing in our fundamental philosophy.  I'd rather try to build a team for the future and accept the risks that come with it.  You'd rather try to maintain the current momentum.  I get that. 

Hell, I'd love to see Carson return to his prime.  He was fun to watch in his early years. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 19, 2011, 02:33:41 PM
It just occurred to me that there's some irony in everyone stepping forward to "oh, surely he won't get hurt" when the only reason Palmer is here is the previous QB got hurt.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 19, 2011, 02:40:57 PM
His injury was a result of him scrambling forward on a pass. If you watch the play, he actually wasn't pressured so much as he realized he had nothing downfield and took off running. Had he slid, he wouldn't have gotten injured. And again, it's not like he's been sacked a ton this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 19, 2011, 02:43:54 PM

I think we're just disagreeing in our fundamental philosophy.  I'd rather try to build a team for the future and accept the risks that come with it.  You'd rather try to maintain the current momentum.  I get that. 


This is not shared by ANY Browns fan.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 19, 2011, 02:46:28 PM
His injury was a result of him scrambling forward on a pass. If you watch the play, he actually wasn't pressured so much as he realized he had nothing downfield and took off running. Had he slid, he wouldn't have gotten injured. And again, it's not like he's been sacked a ton this year.

Exactly. I don't see Carson taking off anytime soon when he's pressured. He'll just throw it 3 deep into the stands.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 19, 2011, 03:16:11 PM
So would Jason Campbell, but he knows deep inside that he couldn't hit water if he fell out of a boat, and that if tried to throw the ball away it would go directly the defender most likely to return it for a touchdown. So he ran for it, and allowed himself to get injured so Oakland would be forced to go out and get an actual QB. He is a hero, and I hope he gets a ring for it!  :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 19, 2011, 04:04:20 PM
Who's the QB at Seattle now? Rick Mirer?





 :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 19, 2011, 04:08:41 PM
It doesn't matter. Whoever it is will be gone soon enough. Hopefully taking Pete Carroll with him.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 19, 2011, 04:53:31 PM
Pete has a long and expensive contract. He's going to be there for at least another season after this one, I would say.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 19, 2011, 06:47:06 PM
Yeah, you're stuck with Carroll through at least mid-season next year. They won't admit it was a mistake until it's way too late to fix it without 3 more years of rebuilding under a competent head coach.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 23, 2011, 12:38:34 PM
ZOMG Tebow actually completed a pass, and it was for a TD! :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 23, 2011, 01:19:47 PM
ZOMG Tebow actually completed a pass, and it was for a TD! :awesome_for_real:
:drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on October 23, 2011, 01:22:33 PM
Well, it *was* Gator-day or some such BS in Miami today.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 23, 2011, 01:26:49 PM
I've never actually seen a team lay down in the NFL until today. That was disgusting. You could tell the coaching staff figured out they were going to win, and everyone just quit playing for the last 4 minutes of the game AND overtime.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 23, 2011, 02:19:34 PM
3rd INT for Boller and it's not even halftime yet :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on October 23, 2011, 02:39:05 PM
I've never actually seen a team lay down in the NFL until today. That was disgusting. You could tell the coaching staff figured out they were going to win, and everyone just quit playing for the last 4 minutes of the game AND overtime.

Why would the coaching staff try to throw the game when they're all going to be fired long before they ever get to see Luck?  No, they're really just that horrible.  Why the hell are they going for 2 when they're up 12-0?  Because Sparano has no business coaching anything, that's why.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 23, 2011, 02:41:59 PM
The Raiders Carlson Palmer Era is about to begin :awesome_for_real:

Edit: first TD for Palmer!...on an INT :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on October 23, 2011, 03:19:53 PM
ZOMG Tebow actually completed a pass, and it was for a TD! :awesome_for_real:
:drill:


I, too, was amused at the breathless recap.

Ed: Wow just checked ESPN.com.. 28:0 in the raiders, KC game? Ow.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 23, 2011, 03:36:41 PM
Denver should play Orton for the first three quarters and Tebow in the 4th. I think that'll give them the best chance of winning :awesome_for_real:

(only half-joking)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on October 23, 2011, 04:34:50 PM
So my fantasy team needed a QB to cover Brady's bye this week, so earlier this week I traded DeMarco Murray for Matt Cassel because I'm just as awesome at this football stuff as Tony Sparano.  :facepalm:

Of course, the guy I traded him to left him on the bench which makes him even dumber than me.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 23, 2011, 04:49:53 PM
I've never actually seen a team lay down in the NFL until today. That was disgusting. You could tell the coaching staff figured out they were going to win, and everyone just quit playing for the last 4 minutes of the game AND overtime.

Why would the coaching staff try to throw the game when they're all going to be fired long before they ever get to see Luck?  No, they're really just that horrible.  Why the hell are they going for 2 when they're up 12-0?  Because Sparano has no business coaching anything, that's why.

Because they've been told they are getting fired and they will get a tasty bonus if they lose every game. Who knows why? All I know is that no coach in their right mind would align their defense on a two point conversion with no linebackers to protect against a Tebow run.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on October 23, 2011, 05:31:32 PM
I am lawling at Painters 'no huddle' offense.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 23, 2011, 06:43:30 PM
Yeah I'm wondering how the Colts come out for the second half.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 23, 2011, 06:48:32 PM
I thought it was a "no offense" huddle.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on October 23, 2011, 07:21:14 PM
3rd INT for Boller and it's not even halftime yet :facepalm:


God damn.  I knew picking up KC's defense this weekend was going to be a decent move, but I wasn't expecting 37 points from it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on October 23, 2011, 08:10:32 PM
So who is worse, the Dolphins blowing that 55 minute lead, or the Colts and this embarrassment tonight?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 23, 2011, 08:22:35 PM
So who is worse, the Dolphins blowing that 55 minute lead, or the Colts and this embarrassment tonight?

Colts. I still think the Dolphins did it on purpose.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on October 23, 2011, 09:19:54 PM
And I still think you overestimate the competency of the Dolphins coaching staff.  Keep in mind, this is the same staff that made a trade to get Reggie Bush as their featured back before the season even started.  If they had actually been trying to lose that game at the end, they'd have somehow managed to accidentally score 2 more touchdowns.  :why_so_serious:

I think I'd say that the Colts had the worse loss, but the Dolphins are the worse team.  Indy was playing a very pissed off Saints team with something to prove after losing to Tampa the previous week.  Everyone knew the Colts were going to lose, but 62 points is a lot no matter how bad your team is.

On the other hand, the Dolphins managed to blow a 15 point lead in two minutes to a team with no wide receivers, no running backs and Tim fucking Tebow as the QB.  Any bad team can lose big to a good team.  Even some decent teams have had 40+ points dropped on them this season.  But it takes a special kind of suck to lose the way the Fins did today.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 23, 2011, 10:06:27 PM
I kind of feel like the Seahawks 6-3 loss is right up there in the sad zone.

EDIT: At least Carson Palmer didn't get hurt right?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 24, 2011, 03:30:47 AM
I kind of feel like the Seahawks 6-3 loss is right up there in the sad zone.

EDIT: At least Carson Palmer didn't get hurt right?  :why_so_serious:

Only the Browns can actually win a game and still come out looking like losers.  :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 24, 2011, 04:37:13 AM
This Colts team may be the worst ever.  And I guess this pretty much cements the idea that Payton Manning is worth 8-10 wins just by himself.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Azuredream on October 24, 2011, 04:53:56 AM
This Colts team may be the worst ever.  And I guess this pretty much cements the idea that Payton Manning is worth 8-10 wins just by himself.

I have a hard time believing that this collapse is just because of minus one Peyton Manning.. there has to be some other things that are compounding it, not that I know what they are.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 24, 2011, 05:05:36 AM
Replace Aaron Rogers with Kyle Boller in Green Bay and you'd get similar results. 

Indy is getting old.  Wayne is past his prime and Addai can't stay healthy.  Manning was the duct tape holding the team together. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on October 24, 2011, 05:09:54 AM
I hope my 7-9 Lions prediction doesn't come true......


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on October 24, 2011, 05:36:04 AM
I don't think so...I didn't see the whole game, but what I did see appeared to be an Atlanta D line that just tore the shit out of the Detroit O Line on that particular day.

Replace Aaron Rogers with Kyle Boller in Green Bay and you'd get similar results. 

Indy is getting old.  Wayne is past his prime and Addai can't stay healthy.  Manning was the duct tape holding the team together. 

I can't quiite go along with the comparison to Green Bay, but otherwise, yeah.  I think Indy's D has been very suspect, and the lack of having a sustainable offense on the field just magnifies things.  Payton makes them better just by keeping them off the field.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on October 24, 2011, 07:59:58 AM
They had a pretty damning statistic on the TV during that game, where Indy hasn't won a single fucking game if Manning wasn't playing. Like, ever.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 24, 2011, 08:02:50 AM
Indy is happy to lose at this point. They and Miami and going to try and out-shitty each other.

I think Indy blinks first. Their losing schedule has more craptacular opponents.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 24, 2011, 08:13:14 AM
Who is going to win the Andrew Luck bowl? :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 24, 2011, 08:17:05 AM
I still think it would be hilarious if Andrew just said, Nah I'm not going to come out this season. I really want the degree.


EDIT: Also congratulations to SF on wrapping up their division title without playing a game yesterday!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 24, 2011, 08:39:01 AM
I still think it would be hilarious if Andrew just said, Nah I'm not going to come out this season. I really want the degree.


EDIT: Also congratulations to SF on wrapping up their division title without playing a game yesterday!

I think he is done with his degree this year IIRC...hence why he stayed this past year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 24, 2011, 08:45:56 AM
I seriously doubt he stays.  If he gets his degree, which I believe he will, he would need his head examined to stick around.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 24, 2011, 08:46:24 AM
Another crazy fucking weekend in the NFL.

The Raiders and Carson Palmer - shit. At least I was justified in saying that Kyle Boller is shit, and at least Palmer has the excuse of having all of 4 days to learn the playbook. Losing McFadden was likely a HUGE issue in this game, but still, they can't be this bad a team, can they? KC seems to have learned how to play defense at the very least.

The Atlanta-Detroit game was a good one. Where was this Atlanta team all year? They haven't looked this good on either side of the ball in any game I've seen them play. Their defense teed off on Stafford, thanks to the Lions not really having much of a running game to be concerned about. I don't think Atlanta's running game was spectacular, but it did what it needed to when it needed it. The Lions better hope Best gets back soon, because they need SOMEONE to run the ball at least a little bit. Or catch the ball out of the backfield, because a lot of their short passes should have been caught today but weren't.

San Diego is really not a good 4-2 team. Both the Pats and the Jets defense handled Rivers and this offense. The Jets controlled the Chargers running game, and their coverage on Vincent Jackson was really good. The Chargers run defense couldn't stop Greene and even their coverage was soft. Can NO ONE cover Plaxico? Throw some sweat pants at him, see if he flinches. With KC finding some form, and the Raiders looking very suspect without McFadden, the AFC West may actually be up for grabs. I still don't think this is a great Jets team, but the Chargers are probably a 9-7 team, 10-6 at best.

The Rams... sigh. This team shouldn't be this bad. Not having Bradford hurt, but I really think is is the offensive system as much as anything else.

Green Bay tried to lose the game to the Vikes, but their defense toughened up in the end. Christian Ponder looked really good but the offensive system and the lack of any weapons in the passing game are going to hinder him. Percy Harvin is the best receiver on that team, everyone else is just shit. They don't seem willing to throw the ball deep, though Ponder looks like he could pull it off if he had anyone open. Rodgers is the man, and James Starks is really starting to come into his own.

I'm so glad I didn't make any attempt to watch the Colts game. That's not even goddamn funny. The scariest part is that if you look at the box score, the Colts were balanced on offense (23 running plays, 22 passes) and Brown got 89 yards on 10 carries. But a total of 45 offensive plays isn't going to get it done. They can't hold the ball and their defense can't get off the field. Amazing how bad this team is without Manning, and I think they may have just given up.

The fucking Dolphins - could they be worse than the Colts? Losing to goddamn Tim Tebow in his first start after shutting him out for 3 quarters is just horrible. Now I get to hear how Tim Tebow is the Broncos' savior or some shit. Shoot me fucking now. They get Detroit next week, so I look forward to seeing Suh eat his liver.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 24, 2011, 08:49:39 AM
they can't be this bad a team, can they?

It is the Raiders, so it's not surprising. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on October 24, 2011, 09:42:36 AM
One of the better statistics of the Colts/Saints game, is the saints didn't have a THIRD down till like the third or fourth quarter?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on October 24, 2011, 09:55:11 AM
They had a pretty damning statistic on the TV during that game, where Indy hasn't won a single fucking game if Manning wasn't playing. Like, ever.

One of the guys in the office made a point of asking that while the offense was built entirely around Manning, what's the defense's excuse?



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on October 24, 2011, 10:02:10 AM
The defense having to play 4 times the normal amount in a game probably didn't help any.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 24, 2011, 10:16:32 AM
The Atlanta-Detroit game was a good one. Where was this Atlanta team all year? They haven't looked this good on either side of the ball in any game I've seen them play. Their defense teed off on Stafford, thanks to the Lions not really having much of a running game to be concerned about. I don't think Atlanta's running game was spectacular, but it did what it needed to when it needed it. The Lions better hope Best gets back soon, because they need SOMEONE to run the ball at least a little bit. Or catch the ball out of the backfield, because a lot of their short passes should have been caught today but weren't.

You were watching a different game than me, I think. I couldn't get over how bad everyone looked in that Falcons game. For starters, there were 21 penalties in that game for 161 yards. It was very sloppy on both sides of the ball. Second, Stafford was complete shit that entire game and it wasn't just the defense. He went 15/32, and couldn't convert a 3rd down to save his life. He took 3 sacks, but was only hit 5 times. It was like the clock in his head was a second too fast and he made a lot of terrible passes. What's shocking to me was that the runningbacks were averaging almost 5 yards a carry, but for some reason the Lions insisted on passing it 32 times compared to 20 runs. I don't get that kind of playcalling. The worst was when a 20 yard run set up a first and goal, and the Lions threw it 3 times in a row for nothing, then kicked a FG.

Ryan overthrew everyone all game. He tossed two picks to one TD, and one of those picks was over the head of Tony Gonzalez, who is 6'5". By the end of the game, Ryan had a 63 passer rating, but the Falcons won because their FG kicker is Mr. Automatic right now.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 24, 2011, 10:18:20 AM
They had a pretty damning statistic on the TV during that game, where Indy hasn't won a single fucking game if Manning wasn't playing. Like, ever.
One of the guys in the office made a point of asking that while the offense was built entirely around Manning, what's the defense's excuse?
The D is built to play with a lead so Freeney and Mathis can tee off on the QB. They also have a very young and inexperienced secondary.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 24, 2011, 12:00:50 PM
The Falcons had lots of penalties, but unlike every other game I've seen them play this year, their defense actually got to the QB. And as for Stafford's problems, there were plenty of catchable balls his receivers just dropped. I didn't say the Falcons looked great, but they've looked so goddamn shitty the entire year, this was an improvement. The team just isn't as good this year, though I can't explain why.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Velorath on October 24, 2011, 12:35:27 PM
Who is going to win the Andrew Luck bowl? :awesome_for_real:

Because nothing is guaranteed to turn a team around better than throwing a rookie QB out there on a crap team.  Luck's only value to the dregs of the league is as trading material.  The Rams right now are living proof that even if Luck is able to make the transition to the NFL, drafting a good QB isn't enough to turn a team around, and risks getting him injured playing behind a shitty O-line.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 24, 2011, 12:37:15 PM
Who is going to win the Andrew Luck bowl? :awesome_for_real:

Because nothing is guaranteed to turn a team around better than throwing a rookie QB out there on a crap team.  Luck's only value to the dregs of the league is as trading material.  The Rams right now are living proof that even if Luck is able to make the transition to the NFL, drafting a good QB isn't enough to turn a team around, and risks getting him injured playing behind a shitty O-line.

Carolina strikes me as something of a counter-example. Sure, they're not winning *yet* but Newton has turned that franchise from a pit of doom and gloom to one with real upside.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Velorath on October 24, 2011, 12:49:56 PM
Who is going to win the Andrew Luck bowl? :awesome_for_real:

Because nothing is guaranteed to turn a team around better than throwing a rookie QB out there on a crap team.  Luck's only value to the dregs of the league is as trading material.  The Rams right now are living proof that even if Luck is able to make the transition to the NFL, drafting a good QB isn't enough to turn a team around, and risks getting him injured playing behind a shitty O-line.

Carolina strikes me as something of a counter-example. Sure, they're not winning *yet* but Newton has turned that franchise from a pit of doom and gloom to one with real upside.

The Rams looked the same way last season.  They went from winning one game in 2009 to winning 7 in 2010 with Bradford who set a record for most completed passes by a rookie QB.  And yet here they are a year later winless, with Bradford out with a high ankle sprain.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 24, 2011, 01:03:09 PM
Newton is not a great example.  He's not a typical quarterback or draftee in any regard, and it's also still way too early to pass judgment on him. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 24, 2011, 01:27:37 PM
Whatever team drafts Luck is hopefully going to be smart enough to sit him on the bench for a year or three. Not that they'll have the luxury, since whoever they bring in to start is going to get booed to shit with calls for Luck to start immediately. And yeah, they'd better draft some goddamn O lineman right after him, because that's one of the keys. Rodgers didn't win a Super Bowl until the line in front of him stop sucking donkey cock.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 24, 2011, 01:29:43 PM
Here's the list of QBs taken #1 overall since 1970:

1970 - Terry Bradshaw*! - Pittsburgh Steelers
1971 - Jim Plunkett - New England Patriots
1975 - Steve Bartkowski - Atlanta Falcons
1983 - John Elway*! - Baltimore Colts (traded to Denver Broncos)
1987 - Vinny Testaverde - Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1989 - Troy Aikman*! - Dallas Cowboys
1990 - Jeff George - Indianapolis Colts
1993 - Drew Bledsoe# - New England Patriots
1998 - Peyton Manning! - Indianapolis Colts
1990 - Tim Couch - Cleveland Browns
2001 - Michael Vick - Atlanta Falcons
2002 - David Carr - Houston Texans
2003 - Carlson Palmer - Cincinnati Bengals
2004 - Eli Manning! - San Diego Chargers (traded to New York Giants)
2005 - Alex Smith - San Francisco 49ers
2007 - JaMarcus Russell - Oakland Raiders
2009 - Matthew Stafford - Detroit Lions
2010 - Sam Bradford - St. Louis Rams
2011 - Cam Newton - Carolina Panthers

* Hall of Fame
! Won a Super Bowl with the team they started with
# Went to a Super Bowl with the team they started with

There's been remarkably few complete busts though also very few true superstar QBs.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 24, 2011, 01:32:09 PM
I kind of secretly wish the 49ers would grab Russell just to see what Harbaugh could do with him.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 24, 2011, 01:32:30 PM
Whatever team drafts Luck is hopefully going to be smart enough to sit him on the bench for a year or three. Not that they'll have the luxury, since whoever they bring in to start is going to get booed to shit with calls for Luck to start immediately. And yeah, they'd better draft some goddamn O lineman right after him, because that's one of the keys. Rodgers didn't win a Super Bowl until the line in front of him stop sucking donkey cock.
If the Colts get him and Peyton can still play that would be an ideal situation for Luck. If the Dolphins get him...well good luck there :awesome_for_real:



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on October 24, 2011, 01:48:05 PM
The Dolphins are going to be auctioned off for glue at the end of the season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 24, 2011, 01:49:20 PM
The Dolphins are going to be auctioned off for glue at the end of the season.

That's an insult to glue.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on October 24, 2011, 01:55:54 PM
Have the dolphins had a anything close to a competitive season since Marino retired?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 24, 2011, 02:05:17 PM
They won the AFC East in 2008 with Chad Pennington and their version of the wildcat offense :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on October 24, 2011, 02:10:02 PM
Won the East in 2000 and was a Wild Card in 2001 with the team Jimmy Johnson assembled, but the horrendous drafts by the Wannstache is what started the downward spiral after that.  The only other year they've been relevant since is 2008 when they won the East again with Pennington as QB.

Edit: as annoying as the wildcat became after the Dolphins started using it, that game against the Patriots when they first used it remains a thing of beauty.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 24, 2011, 02:42:52 PM
Here's the list of QBs taken #1 overall since 1970:

1970 - Terry Bradshaw*! - Pittsburgh Steelers
1971 - Jim Plunkett - New England Patriots
1975 - Steve Bartkowski - Atlanta Falcons
1983 - John Elway*! - Baltimore Colts (traded to Denver Broncos)
1987 - Vinny Testaverde - Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1989 - Troy Aikman*! - Dallas Cowboys
1990 - Jeff George - Indianapolis Colts
1993 - Drew Bledsoe# - New England Patriots
1998 - Peyton Manning! - Indianapolis Colts
1990 - Tim Couch - Cleveland Browns
2001 - Michael Vick - Atlanta Falcons
2002 - David Carr - Houston Texans
2003 - Carlson Palmer - Cincinnati Bengals
2004 - Eli Manning! - San Diego Chargers (traded to New York Giants)
2005 - Alex Smith - San Francisco 49ers
2007 - JaMarcus Russell - Oakland Raiders
2009 - Matthew Stafford - Detroit Lions
2010 - Sam Bradford - St. Louis Rams
2011 - Cam Newton - Carolina Panthers

* Hall of Fame
! Won a Super Bowl with the team they started with
# Went to a Super Bowl with the team they started with

There's been remarkably few complete busts though also very few true superstar QBs.

/wow, nice list.

Up until Tim Couch (1999, not 1990 as listed), all those were solid QBs -- even Jeff George (who still says his arm is the same as what he had at "25" and is ready to step in and play) and Testaverde played for over a decade. David Carr might be a bigger bust, but he's carved out a nice role (and good paychecks) as a backup QB for Giants.

But JaMarcus Russell has to be the biggest draft bust in history.

I wondered if he was, so I was looking at #1 overalls for all positions since 1970 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_first_overall_National_Football_League_draft_picks)

DE Walt Patulski (1972), only played a few years
RB Ricky Bell (1977), had a few good seasons, but only 3K career YDS
LB Tom Cousineau (1979), like Patulski, a Bills draft pick, shunned Buffalo, went to Canada, returned for a few NFL seasons, but never was star of #1 overall merit
DE Kenneth Sims (1982), never lived up to expectations, though endured (only playing full season once) 8 seasons
LB Aundray Bruce (1988), only started ~40 games over course of 11 year NFL career
DT Steve Emtman (1992), retired at 27, career highlight 90 yard INT return as rookie
RB Kijana Carter (1995), WE MIGHT HAVE A WINNER HERE, 1K career rushing yards, never recovered from torn knee ligament
DE Courtney Brown (2000), had decent rookie year, but succumbed to injuries

To early to tell on the players drafted since 2005, and Alex Smith getting chance to redeem his poor performance years.

Kijana Carter looks like the biggest bust but at least in his (and others on this list) case, it was a tragic injury -- Jamarcus Russell a bigger bust because it seems more centered on his lack of work ethic (or maybe he wasn't that good, at least at NFL caliber level, not college where he did perform exceptional).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on October 24, 2011, 02:48:36 PM
Worst number 2 pick overall: 1988, Tony Mandarich.

Number 3 pick that year: Barry Sanders


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 24, 2011, 02:53:00 PM
Mandarich is the one that always comes to mind for me, yeah, but I always forget he wasn't a #1.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 24, 2011, 03:00:51 PM
He's got competition from Ryan Leaf.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 24, 2011, 03:10:05 PM
Don't forget Todd Maranovich.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Velorath on October 24, 2011, 03:36:27 PM
Here's the list of QBs taken #1 overall since 1970:

1970 - Terry Bradshaw*! - Pittsburgh Steelers
1971 - Jim Plunkett - New England Patriots
1975 - Steve Bartkowski - Atlanta Falcons
1983 - John Elway*! - Baltimore Colts (traded to Denver Broncos)
1987 - Vinny Testaverde - Tampa Bay Buccaneers
1989 - Troy Aikman*! - Dallas Cowboys
1990 - Jeff George - Indianapolis Colts
1993 - Drew Bledsoe# - New England Patriots
1998 - Peyton Manning! - Indianapolis Colts
1990 - Tim Couch - Cleveland Browns
2001 - Michael Vick - Atlanta Falcons
2002 - David Carr - Houston Texans
2003 - Carlson Palmer - Cincinnati Bengals
2004 - Eli Manning! - San Diego Chargers (traded to New York Giants)
2005 - Alex Smith - San Francisco 49ers
2007 - JaMarcus Russell - Oakland Raiders
2009 - Matthew Stafford - Detroit Lions
2010 - Sam Bradford - St. Louis Rams
2011 - Cam Newton - Carolina Panthers

* Hall of Fame
! Won a Super Bowl with the team they started with
# Went to a Super Bowl with the team they started with

There's been remarkably few complete busts though also very few true superstar QBs.



The superstars often seem to be the ones nobody sees coming when you look at guys like Montana and Brady who went in the 3rd and 6th rounds respectively.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 24, 2011, 03:44:01 PM
Charles Rodgers, the Wideout from Michigan State, goes as one of the worst #2 picks of all time in my book.

Injury prone, steroids, blatant pot smoking, and he beat up a chick.

EDIT: Oh I left out that he was picked one pick before Andre Johnson.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 24, 2011, 03:46:13 PM
In Steve Emtman's defense, he blew out both of his knees a few years before they got really good at repairing them, which is why his career was so short. I wouldn't say he was a bust, just that injuries killed his career. He was a fucking MONSTER when he was healthy in college. Like Suh, but a bit smaller and a lot quicker. And like Suh, he was the guy you found before the snap to watch, which is a pretty nice compliment to a defensive tackle.


As for terrible #2s, the prosecution would like to introduce Rick Mirer into evidence.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 24, 2011, 03:52:25 PM
This was a tragic 1st round pick by the Steelers in 83 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gabriel_Rivera) (picked ahead of Pittsburgh native and Pitt standout QB Dan Marino) -- Gabe Rivera -- played 6 games, then a drunk driving accident left him paralyzed.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on October 24, 2011, 03:59:25 PM

As for terrible #2s, the prosecution would like to introduce Rick Mirer into evidence.

Has anyone said Ryan Leaf yet?

Whew.. Trippy beat me to it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 24, 2011, 05:01:00 PM
Don't forget Todd Maranovich.

I thought of this one too and then I went and looked it up and he was picked like 26th or something. That's when I remembered I was thinking of the other M-------ich anyway.

EDIT: I'm not even sure he's the worst #26 pick - hi2u Jim Druckenmiller.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on October 24, 2011, 06:13:27 PM
Ok, I know you guys like to harp on the bust QBs.

But just read who else was in the 1989 draft when the Packers picked:

Quote
Wikipedia:
"Ante Josip "Tony" Mandarich (born September 23, 1966) is a former football offensive lineman of the NFL. He was the first round draft pick of the Green Bay Packers in 1989, second overall behind quarterback Troy Aikman, and ahead of the third selection, running back Barry Sanders, the fourth selection, linebacker Derrick Thomas, and the fifth selection, cornerback Deion Sanders."

4 Hall of Fame players, one total dud.

And he held out so he missed out on training camp. I remember visiting my grandparents early that August outside of Green Bay and the BIGGEST story on the news and in the papers the time I was there was "Holdout still going on!"


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 24, 2011, 07:43:14 PM
This MNF continues a trend of  :ye_gods: this week.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on October 24, 2011, 07:57:33 PM
I just checked the box score before I turned it on. I refreshed the page a few times thinking the stats were from the 1st quarter.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 24, 2011, 07:58:29 PM
What's going on with the Ravens offense?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on October 24, 2011, 08:18:50 PM
No idea, but they're tanking my fantasy team right now.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on October 24, 2011, 08:19:09 PM
They were secretly replaced with the Rams offense.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on October 24, 2011, 08:49:47 PM
Flacco is terrible.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 24, 2011, 08:52:12 PM
What's going on with the Ravens offense?


Joe Flacco. He can be really good and then he lays an absolute duck. He's at the point in his career where he's either going to take that next step up and get rid of some of the mistake throws he makes, or he's going to always be what he appears to be. Good some days, awful the next.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on October 24, 2011, 10:40:47 PM
The funniest thing about this whole Andrew Luck thing is that there is every chance he is going to fucking stink as an NFL QB, and being on a awful, shitty team is just going to make that more likely.  There is NO SUCH THING as a sure fire QB coming out of college.  There have been several sure things over the past decades, and it often doesn't pan out as expected.

I'm not saying that I am either hoping or expecting that he tanks, just that it is beyond silly to try to lose games just to have a chance for him.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 25, 2011, 07:56:47 AM
If Andrew Luck stinks, the projections people might as well quit their jobs and get to farming. EVERYBODY is on this kid as an NFL ready QB. Try and find some detractors. There aren't any.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 25, 2011, 08:01:58 AM
To continue the discussion of shitty quarterbacks, here's a list of the 50 worst quarterbacks in NFL history (http://www.complex.com/sports/2011/10/the-50-worst-quarterbacks-in-nfl-history#1).   :awesome_for_real:

I won't spoil the list for you, but Oakland plays a prominent role.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 25, 2011, 08:10:03 AM
I knew Purple Drank woule be #1.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Outlawedprod on October 25, 2011, 08:11:30 AM
They had a pretty damning statistic on the TV during that game, where Indy hasn't won a single fucking game if Manning wasn't playing. Like, ever.

1995 Jim Harbaugh led them into the playoffs as a wild card.  They lost to the Steelers when their hail mary 29 yard pass at the end of regulation failed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5hxVk9XdUE&feature=player_detailpage#t=461s

This was pretty much the only high point until Manning came.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 25, 2011, 09:04:26 AM
I knew Purple Drank woule be #1.

And the biggest lesson to me out of that list? DON'T FUCKING HOLD OUT, ESPECIALLY IF YOU ARE A QB. The amount of prep that goes into learning how to be an NFL QB is insane, and every single second counts. Too bad teams can't take a mulligan on a QB they draft who holds out, because they likely just wasted a shitload of effort on a guy that's going to set their franchise back half-a-decade.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 25, 2011, 09:07:45 AM
I thought they overplayed the "hold out" theory.  There's plenty of shitty quarterbacks that didn't hold out.  I suspect that most of the hold outs on the list would still have been shit-tastic, even with the extra time.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 25, 2011, 10:06:09 AM
Here's a better plan. Don't draft an SEC QB in the first round. I'm not sold on any of them except the Mannings.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 25, 2011, 10:19:30 AM
This was pretty much the only high point until Manning came.

Umm...

(http://withfriendship.com/images/g/32278/johnny-unitas-290-johnny-u.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on October 25, 2011, 11:43:07 AM
No I mean they showed the Colts stats since Manning joined or whatever. Then compared it to when Brady got hurt and some other QB who I've forgotten.

NE was like 10-6 without Brady, but the Colts were 0 wins.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on October 25, 2011, 12:18:07 PM
To continue the discussion of shitty quarterbacks, here's a list of the 50 worst quarterbacks in NFL history (http://www.complex.com/sports/2011/10/the-50-worst-quarterbacks-in-nfl-history#1).   :awesome_for_real:

I won't spoil the list for you, but Oakland plays a prominent role.   :grin:

NO KERRY COLLINS NO PEACE

Seeing Dave Brown made me laugh. I can laugh about him now.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 25, 2011, 12:23:44 PM
The real question right now is who are the worst starting QBs in the league?

I think it's something like:

Tim Tebow
Curtis Painter
Joe Flacco
Mark Sanchez
Rex Grossman
Matt Moore


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Azuredream on October 25, 2011, 12:30:15 PM
[Whoever is starting for Seattle this week]

edit; yeah, Sanchez doesn't belong on that list.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on October 25, 2011, 12:31:22 PM
Why is Sanchez in that list? He doesn't seem anywhere near the same level of awful as the rest.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 25, 2011, 12:54:03 PM
He has perhaps the biggest difference between perceived ability and actual ability in the league.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 25, 2011, 01:10:26 PM
Blaine Gabbert.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 25, 2011, 01:16:30 PM
Sanchez and Flacco are about the same level. They can be good and they can be wretched. Averaged out over a season, they are decent but not spectacular QB's.

My list -

ELITE
Peyton "The Neck" Manning
Tom Brady
Aaron Rodgers
Philip Rivers
Drew Brees

Really Good but not Great
Matt Schaub
Ben Rapistburger
Matt Hasselback

Good With the Occasional HOLY FUCK WHAT WERE YOU THINKING
Tony Romo
Eli Manning
Michael Vick
Jay Cutler

Good But Too Young to Be Considered Great Yet
Cam Newton
Matt Stafford
Christian Ponder
Josh Freeman
Sam Bradford
Andy Dalton
Colt McCoy

Are Never Going to be Better Than They Are Right Now (and could be worse on any given Sunday)
Joe Flacco
Mark Sanchez
Carson Palmer
Alex Smith
Matt Cassel
Matt Ryan
Kyle Orton
Ryan Fitzpatrick
Kevin Kolb

HOW THE FUCK DID THEY GET A STARTING JOB????
Chad Henne
Rex Grossman
John Beck
Tavaris Jackson
Charlie Whitehurst
AJ Feeley
Matt Moore
Curtis Painter
Kerry Collins
Vince Young
Kyle Boller
Tim Tebow

Jury is still out
Blaine Gabbert


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 25, 2011, 01:23:00 PM
Why is Sanchez in that list? He doesn't seem anywhere near the same level of awful as the rest.

I disagree.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 25, 2011, 02:35:18 PM
Sanchez and Flacco are about the same level. They can be good and they can be wretched. Averaged out over a season, they are decent but not spectacular QB's.

My list -

ELITE
Peyton "The Neck" Manning
Tom Brady
Aaron Rodgers
Philip Rivers
Drew Brees

Really Good but not Great
Matt Schaub
Ben Rapistburger
Matt Hasselback



Rivers rated ahead of Roethlisberger? WTF has Rivers ever won? Ben been to 3 SB, with 2 rings, and except maybe for the 1st one (and which he posted phenomenal regular season W-L record for 1st two NFL seasons) where it could be argued "team carried him", mostly on his arm and playmaking. And like I put forth numbers from the stat heads, Ben > Manning over past 3 seasons. And Manning might be totally done as "elite" QB status goes. I'd put Ben on par with Brees.

But Ben nor Brees not in class of Brady and Rodgers.

Schaub and Hasselback? Hasselback at one time could be considered in the good-very good range -- now he's teetering between below average and good. Right now, this season, I'd rather have Cam Newton or Josh Freeman than Matty H or Schaub (who had accomplished almost zero) as starting QB.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 25, 2011, 02:39:09 PM
Who gives a shit what he's won? He can't play the 21 other positions on the field. He's a more skilled/talented QB than Big Ben. The Chargers haven't lost because Rivers has failed. Look at last year's team. They led the league in offense AND defense. Special teams lost them a totally legit shot at the Super Bowl. Rivers can't control that kind of thing, holding it against him is ridiculous.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 25, 2011, 02:40:36 PM
I think Ben's rings can be attributed to his team as much as himself. I think you put Ben on a team like the Eagles or even the Colts team that Manning won with and he does not win Super Bowls. An elite QB carries a team. Ben doesn't always carry that team nearly as much as their defense does. His first Super Bowl was fucking terrible. He won on running game and defense. His second Super Bowl was better but again, defense won that game for them. Peyton's Super Bowl win was against a really good Bears defense. Brees's gaudy numbers put him ahead of the Rapist because he's constantly throwing to 7, 8 guys a game, and only one of those is what I would consider a top line wideout (Colston).

EDIT: And to answer the Rivers thing, Rivers has carried that team for seasons. Vincent Jackson is no Hines Ward (though maybe Antonio Gates is). Last year he was throwing to guys off the street, with a defense and special teams that gave up big plays often.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 25, 2011, 03:00:07 PM
It's just pants-on-head retarded to suggest that a QB on a bad or mediocre team has to play far better than one on a good team to be considered at the same skill level. The end.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 25, 2011, 03:03:55 PM
Manning on a mediocre team makes them a good team - this season is evidence of that. He just probably wouldn't be considered elite on a shitty team like Denver because his numbers wouldn't be as good. Pittsburgh has never been a shitty team while Rothliesberger is there. They've had a defense, good wideouts, and most of the time, a good running game. Hell, he missed 4 games last season and the Steelers barely noticed - didn't they go 3-1 in that stretch? While the Colts have gone 0-7 without Manning and an UGLY 0-7 at that. Elite QB's make good teams into great teams.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 25, 2011, 03:20:32 PM
Glad to see Colston getting some love here.  He's been a quiet playmaker his whole career.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 25, 2011, 03:41:21 PM
Manning on a mediocre team makes them a good team - this season is evidence of that. He just probably wouldn't be considered elite on a shitty team like Denver because his numbers wouldn't be as good. Pittsburgh has never been a shitty team while Rothliesberger is there. They've had a defense, good wideouts, and most of the time, a good running game. Hell, he missed 4 games last season and the Steelers barely noticed - didn't they go 3-1 in that stretch? While the Colts have gone 0-7 without Manning and an UGLY 0-7 at that. Elite QB's make good teams into great teams.

And by contrast a shitty QB on a good team costs them dearly. It's the reason why Rex Ryan is ringless.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on October 25, 2011, 03:49:01 PM
I'd disagree with that given the available alternatives for them.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 25, 2011, 04:06:57 PM
I'd disagree with that given the available alternatives for them.

Would you agree that if Phillip Rivers played on the Jets, they would win a Super Bowl with that defense?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on October 25, 2011, 04:11:51 PM
This year? No.  Last year, perhaps.

I'm just wondering how they could possibly do better at this point.  Who could they have gotten that would be a definite upgrade?  Cutler? Kolb? Cassel?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 25, 2011, 04:18:56 PM
Orton.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on October 25, 2011, 06:22:18 PM
To continue the discussion of shitty quarterbacks, here's a list of the 50 worst quarterbacks in NFL history (http://www.complex.com/sports/2011/10/the-50-worst-quarterbacks-in-nfl-history#1).   :awesome_for_real:

I won't spoil the list for you, but Oakland plays a prominent role.   :grin:

NO KERRY COLLINS NO PEACE

Seeing Dave Brown made me laugh. I can laugh about him now.

Fuck.

I had managed to forget about Dave Brown until this post.  Thanks Sjofn!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on October 25, 2011, 06:25:10 PM
REALLY you should be thanking Ghost!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Outlawedprod on October 25, 2011, 07:17:48 PM
Umm...

(http://withfriendship.com/images/g/32278/johnny-unitas-290-johnny-u.jpg)

Maybe I should have clarified. I have never considered the Indianapolis Colts the same team.  When they left Baltimore it really became a new team.  The Indy Colts sucked overall for many years. Though they did make the playoffs with Trudeau one year I know (it kind of helps when you have Eric Dickerson).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 25, 2011, 08:20:22 PM
This year? No.  Last year, perhaps.

I'm just wondering how they could possibly do better at this point.  Who could they have gotten that would be a definite upgrade?  Cutler? Kolb? Cassel?

A lot of it would depend on how good the running game is. And their running game has been uniformly terrible this year. Orton is more accurate. Cutler is about the same as Sanchez with accuracy, and with the O line problems they've had this year, Cutler wouldn't have been an upgrade. Cassel might have been sort of a side grade.

David Garrard might have been an upgrade. Not flashy, but won't throw the ball away as much as Sanchez.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 25, 2011, 09:34:51 PM
I think Ben's rings can be attributed to his team as much as himself. I think you put Ben on a team like the Eagles or even the Colts team that Manning won with and he does not win Super Bowls. An elite QB carries a team. Ben doesn't always carry that team nearly as much as their defense does. His first Super Bowl was fucking terrible. He won on running game and defense. His second Super Bowl was better but again, defense won that game for them. Peyton's Super Bowl win was against a really good Bears defense. Brees's gaudy numbers put him ahead of the Rapist because he's constantly throwing to 7, 8 guys a game, and only one of those is what I would consider a top line wideout (Colston).

No. Anyone that has suffered through likes of Malone, Stoudt, Woodley, Brister, O'Donnell  and Stewart (except for a couple of good seasons -- and here is a QB that Cowher coaching ruined, and did little to nurture, and yanked him immediately upon any struggling -- I mean, when you lead your team to 2 championship games and the season after you get replaced with Tommy Maddox…).

Even this year, without Ben, the Steelers are easily 2-5 instead of 5-2. When your best offensive lineman was waived in off-season, and sitting on the couch October 1 and the rest of the 1st unit almost all injured and in shambles (and even 2 of those guys couldn't start for most NFL squads). Yeah, he's had some decent receivers, but the RB situation has been iffy -- Bettis good when healthy but always broke down by end of year, Parker had a good season or two, and now Mendenhall is decent at best. And the defense while being good, is not the force it was back in the 90s -- especially against elite QB that seem to carve them up with ease.

Again, he not in Rodgers or Brady class, but he on the next tier with Brees.

Rivers is a crybaby douche and not a team leader, at least judged by what I've seen of him in big games.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on October 25, 2011, 10:59:00 PM
Rivers is "fiery and emotional"...which I supposed could be perceived as crybaby douche territory, but it has far more upside than down.  He is a stud of a QB, and I would put him pretty much exactly where Haemish did (in fact, I pretty much agree with his enitre list top to bottom, except for maybe Fitzpatrick who I think still has upside).  The reasons the Charges fail is because of Special Teams and Norv Motherfucking Turner.  The Chargers hating is a little funny, considering they are off to an unusually good start for once.

And Brees is much better than Rapistburgers.  Give me a break.  Steelers over the years are one of the most well rounded teams out there.  They have had good skill position players on offense and a fantastic defense.  Ben helped in those efforts, but the team around him made it a whole lot easier.  I will give him this much:  He has an uncanny ability to get out of trouble and make plays out of it.  Also has an uncanny ability dive for the end zone, clearly NOT make it, and yet still be granted a touchdown that somehow gets upheld after review.  Last but not least, Fuck Rapistburgers.  Nobody is saying he sucks...he's definitely up there.  Just a notch lower than the elite.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 26, 2011, 06:54:12 AM
Nobody is saying he sucks...he's definitely up there.  Just a notch lower than the elite.

You are wildly insane if you believe Big Ben isn't an elite QB. He's passed for almost 25,000 yards, won rookie of the year, won 2 Super Bowls, was a pro-bowler, is the only QB to ever register two perfect passing games in one regular season, and has the highest career passer rating in Steelers history.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 26, 2011, 06:57:18 AM
Yeah, Roethlisberger is better than the people here would like to admit.  Is he helped by being on a good team?  Yes, and sure he's no Payton Manning, but nobody else is.  Roethlisberger is pretty damned good in his own right.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 26, 2011, 07:01:10 AM
Well he's a complete dipshit, so I can see how that colors perceptions, but we didn't judge athletes on their off-the-field shit until the internet became big business (unless it was due to performence drugs).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 26, 2011, 08:09:20 AM
Most athletes are upstanding human beings and excellent role models. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 26, 2011, 08:32:47 AM
I'm not saying Rothliesberger sucks. He's very good, just not great. Again, I have to point to the fact that the Steelers did not collapse last year with him out 4 games and compare that to the way the Colts have disintegrated without Manning this year, with essentially the same offensive personnel. Looking back at team rushing stats for the years he's won the Super Bowl compared to the year Manning won the Super Bowl, his 2005 season, he had a fantastic running game (over 2,000 rushing yards), the Colts in 2006 had over 1,700 rushing yards and the Steelers in 2008 had over 1600 rushing yards and in 2010 had over 1900 rushing yards. He's always had a running game. But I think if you take him out of that system, put him on a team like say Minnesota where his receivers aren't as good as Mike Wallace and Hines Ward (or Ward and Santonio Holmes or Plaxico Burress like he's had in the past), his numbers will dip dramatically.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 26, 2011, 08:33:39 AM
Being a winner can put you into "great".  Roethlisberger is a winner.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 26, 2011, 09:45:09 AM
Being a winner can put you into "great".  Roethlisberger is a winner.

Explain to me again how Dilfer has SB ring again?  :why_so_serious:

You can hate Big Ben for his off the field shenanigans and even let it bias you. I hate the Stillers and Big Ben right along with them, but I have seen the man play more times than I care to since the games here are more celebrated than church on Sundays and ALWAYS on a local TV channel... and he finds time behind that shower curtain of an O-Line. Whether that being a scramble or just being too big to bring down before he gets a pass off, he has instinct and plays from that. Manning and Brady orchestrate the field while Big Ben manages the deli counter at lunch time.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 26, 2011, 09:53:56 AM
I notice how almost every detractor of Big Ben doesn't bother to evaluate his performences, but actually finds a way to BLAME his success on some other factor.

Oh and that they hate him personally.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 26, 2011, 09:58:05 AM
The Ravens could have had a corpse playing QB that year with that defense. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 26, 2011, 10:48:22 AM
The Ravens could have had a corpse playing QB that year with that defense.  

See also: the 1985 Chicago Bears

I think that Worthlessberger is similar to Bradshaw.  He's a decent QB that greatly benefits from having a strong defense to bail him out from time to time.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 26, 2011, 11:24:34 AM
It's very difficult to ascertain how good a quality quarterback really is if they are on a good team unless something like the Manning issue occurs.  I would take Roethlisberger on my team over any number of guys in the league right now, even Manning due to age. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 26, 2011, 12:14:56 PM
If you look at my list, I'd take the Rapistberger over 33 other QB's in the league.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 26, 2011, 12:25:13 PM
It's asking a lot to look back at a previous page, but yeah, that's a good list.  I agree with all of it.  I'd take Rapey McRaperson over the other two guys you've got him grouped with though, and probably over Rivers.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 26, 2011, 01:20:12 PM
I hesitated with Hasselback, because you know he's going to get injured this year. When he's ON, he can almost carry a team, but he's getting to the end of a good career and he can't run for shit (something Big Ben can do). Yet he still got that shitty Seattle team to the playoffs last year and was instrumental in getting them a playoff win. If Schaub had a complete team with him, he'd possibly be elite status, IMO. He's put up great numbers with bad teams, and really only 1 weapon (Andre Johnson) in the passing game, though Foster is starting to be a beast receiver as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on October 26, 2011, 02:46:22 PM

Explain to me again how Dilfer has SB ring again?  :why_so_serious:

(http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/000/685/583/728620_display_image.jpg?1296593075)


 :heartbreak:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 26, 2011, 06:23:10 PM
Regarding Tim Tebow: http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/2011/10/the-inner-torment-of-john-fox.html


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on October 26, 2011, 06:34:54 PM
Quote
Go back to Gainesville and manufacture human misery that we can laugh at from afar. That’s what Florida is for, why we even keep it around.

 :awesome_for_real:

I knew there had to be SOME reason!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 26, 2011, 08:54:43 PM
That was goddamn brilliant.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on October 26, 2011, 10:30:55 PM
Oh man that was hilarious.

Look, nobody is saying Rapistburgers is anything less than a very good QB.  Maybe great.  He'll probably even make it into the Hall of Fame, where a couple of those on the elite list may not.  But for my money, I will take each of those guys Haemish put ahead of him.  That's what it boils down to, and it has nothing to do with the fact that I hate him with the scorching fury of 10 suns.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on October 27, 2011, 05:17:14 AM
The goddamn comments section is even gold. 



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 27, 2011, 08:15:53 AM
That's some Haemish-grade level of hate there.

See, I don't hate Tim Tebow. I hate the media's fascination with him, as well as people in my general area who are SEC fans who thought he could do no wrong. There is nothing in his previous work that makes me think he can be an NFL QB. That doesn't make him a bad person, it just means that the Broncos organization is going to waste a lot of money for nothing, and their fans are going to be pinning their hopes on another Vince Young. Good luck with that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 27, 2011, 08:19:58 AM
I actually kind of like Tebow.  He's going to be a shitty NFL quarterback, but it's not like he's an asshole like some of the other guys you see.  He's just a little bit of a religious nutcase, which I guess is okay.  Plus it will be great to watch the fail happen, if it does and if he turns out okay then so be it. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 27, 2011, 08:27:18 AM
I think the hate comes out of envy/jealousy.  It all reminds me of Uncle Rico from Napoleon Dynamite.  The haters are the guys that wish they could go back in time and be the stars of their high school team.  They'd show everyone that they're better than Tebow. 

I also wanted to say something about Tony Mandarich from the previous page.  The guy may have been a bust, but I don't think he was as bad a draft pick as people think.  I played against the guy in college and he was a monster.  He was the only lineman that ever struck fear into a defense.  The guy was 305 lbs and could outrun most linebackers (like a 4.6s 40y).  As a pulling guard, that's some scary stuff.  I understand why GB took him ahead of Barry as well.  Barry was undersized for the NFL at the time (remember Earl Campbell and Christian Akoye?) and was a huge risk to be successful at that level. 



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 27, 2011, 08:33:46 AM
I think the hate comes out of envy/jealousy.

Maybe for some. For Georgia fans, the hate is simple.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on October 27, 2011, 08:49:09 AM
I played against the guy in college and he was a monster.
I think I found your team picture.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/0/09/Dogearteam.jpg/800px-Dogearteam.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 27, 2011, 08:58:37 AM
I think the hate comes out of envy/jealousy.  

You are wrong.

EDIT: To clarify, I think the hate comes because he got SO MUCH ATTENTION, ignoring the fact that he was on a good team built around him. He's ballsy, he's fearless when he plays, but as a QB, he's not particularly skilled. There were tons of better players than him that got drafted behind him.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Mortriden on October 27, 2011, 09:13:42 AM
I think the hate comes out of envy/jealousy.  

You are wrong.

EDIT: To clarify, I think the hate comes because he got SO MUCH ATTENTION, ignoring the fact that he was on a good team built around him. He's ballsy, he's fearless when he plays, but as a QB, he's not particularly skilled. There were tons of better players than him that got drafted behind him.

I will grant you that the media slobs him a disproportionate amount (like, and incredible amount), but you cannot deny his work ethic or his drive.  The man wants to play, he does everything he can to be a leader on the field.  Now, it may not be the type of leader that we want to see or are used to seeing, but it looks like he's having some success in that aspect. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on October 27, 2011, 09:24:15 AM
I managed to live under a rock and somehow miss all the Tebow hype/drama/hate or whatever.


It'll sort itself out really, does he win games or not? That's ALL that really matters in the end when it comes to football. If he's as bad as people say he is, then he'll be on the curb before the season is over. If he manages to win games through sheer force of will and Jesus power, then he'll stay.


So far he beat the Dolphins, and only barely. That's hardly a barometer of success  :why_so_serious:

Who do they play next?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 27, 2011, 09:26:07 AM
EDIT: To clarify, I think the hate comes because he got SO MUCH ATTENTION, ignoring the fact that he was on a good team built around him. He's ballsy, he's fearless when he plays, but as a QB, he's not particularly skilled. There were tons of better players than him that got drafted behind him.

I see your point, but the guy is in the NFL.  Someone was willing to wager $millions on the fact that he has at least some talent for the position.  Someone that knows a hell of a lot more about the football industrial complex than I do.  Hell, even if he doesn't have the ability, the guy is a good marketing tool.  Love Tebow or hate him, the guy generates press for your team.  

I also like the guy's work ethic.  Perhaps he's on the growth/learning curve and scouts see this as worth a gamble?  I don't know. I also don't know why anyone would hate him.  Hate the media hype, sure.  Hate Tebow?  I don't get it.  He's a hard working and seemingly earnest guy.

As for the pic, I'm the fourth from the right.   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on October 27, 2011, 09:33:19 AM
It'll sort itself out really, does he win games or not? That's ALL that really matters in the end when it comes to football. If he's as bad as people say he is, then he'll be on the curb before the season is over. If he manages to win games through sheer force of will and Jesus power, then he'll stay.

That is the ultimate barometer of a QB -- does he win games for his team?

Tebow mechanics and hoopla decried, but he won games in college. I don't know if that will translate to professional career success but we will soon find out.

I'd compare Tebow with Vince Young, much lamented, for different reasons and a good bit self inflicted. But Vince Young wins games, even in the pro ranks -- where even though his stats are not impressive (his career TD:INT ratio is 42/43, though if you toss in the 12 rushing TD, it doesn't look as bad), he's 30-18 as a starter (http://www.pro-football-reference.com/boxscores/game_query.cgi?qb=YounVi00&yr=).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 27, 2011, 10:29:15 AM
At least with Tebow, you know he won't throw a tantrum like Vince Young did, so if he wins games, great.

As for the idiot that wanted to waste millions on him, I'd blame Josh McDaniels for that. He's currently trying to find a way to end Sam Bradford's career early.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 27, 2011, 11:03:02 AM
I see your point, but the guy is in the NFL.  Someone was willing to wager $millions on the fact that he has at least some talent for the position.  Someone that knows a hell of a lot more about the football industrial complex than I do.

That someone was Josh McDaniels. Hired at 33 years old to be the youngest head coach in the NFL and made a big push to make Timmy T their #1 draft pick. He immediately started off his tenure by fucking up relations with Cutler by leaking trade rumors, pissing off the QB, and summarily having to trade him (with the entire league knowing he was desperate) for Orton. As you've seen recently, Orton sucks so hard he had to be replaced by Tebow, while Cutler manages to survive on a team with the worst offensive line in the history of football. The fact that the Bears are 4-3 is almost uncanny.

But it went deeper than that for McDaniels. He didn't get along with Brandon Marshall, the pro-bowler wide receiver. So, instead of playing him with the playoff berth on the line in 2009, he benched Marshall to assert his authority against the Chiefs. Denver of course lost the game without one of their biggest weapons, and missed the playoffs. Marshall ended up getting send to Miami as punishment in a trade for a bag of chips. But did it stop there? Nooooooo, as a member of the Patriots he picked up Belicheats penchant for video-taping the other team illegally, and McDaniels was fined in 2010 $50,000 by the NFL for taping the SF practice before a game.

The 3-9 record he posted in 2010, and his shitty waste of a pick on Tebow, ultimately got him fired when he lost to KC again. Since that time he was picked up by the St. Louis Rams to be their offensive coordinator, and has led that teams offense to the lowest points per game totals of any team in the NFL with 9.3 PPG. Not since the glory days of the 1992 Seahawks has any team in the NFL averaged less than 10 PPG. So, I ask you, did this man know more of the NFL than you or us? I would submit that, no, in fact he has been an epic fucking disaster every single place he has any actual decision making authority.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 27, 2011, 11:15:17 AM
I think the hate comes out of envy/jealousy. 

Yeah, no. My problem with the whole thing is that I hate seeing an organization bow to public pressure when said pressure is based on people wanting him to play not because he's good, but because of his beliefs.

Also if someone on my team at work was constantly doing the Jesus thing at me like that guy does, I would fucking hate working with him. I have to assume that's true for at least a segment of the other players.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 27, 2011, 12:13:17 PM
Also if someone on my team at work was constantly doing the Jesus thing at me like that guy does, I would fucking hate working with him. I have to assume that's true for at least a segment of the other players.

Pay me $10 million to do what I love and I'll play for BYU.  Like any business, you put up with what you have to in order to make a paycheck. 

I do see your point though.  Perhaps I was a little narrow minded in my statement about 'teh hate'.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 27, 2011, 12:23:14 PM
Yeah, no. My problem with the whole thing is that I hate seeing an organization bow to public pressure when said pressure is based on people wanting him to play not because he's good, but because of his beliefs.

Also if someone on my team at work was constantly doing the Jesus thing at me like that guy does, I would fucking hate working with him. I have to assume that's true for at least a segment of the other players.

So that makes you hate Tebow?  Again, I guess I don't get all the hatred.  He plays hard and works hard.  If the team opts to play him that's not his fault.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 27, 2011, 12:28:22 PM
When you wear your religious beliefs on your chest, well that is one sure fire way to make me dislike you greatly. Those that do, do it with intent to send out a message to everyone they encounter, passively or aggressively. And yes, that biases my attitude toward him as a player and yes that makes me a shitheel but I am ok with that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 27, 2011, 12:29:59 PM
Hey man, I hate hyper-religious people as much as the next guy but I don't let it cloud my vision about sports.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on October 27, 2011, 12:34:55 PM
He is:
A) not as good of a player as the hype machine has led everyone to believe.

and

B) using his position as a bully-pulpit to push his religious beliefs on other people in a way no other sports figure does.


I can overlook A, there are a lot of players that way. But I refuse to overlook B.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 27, 2011, 12:35:39 PM
Yeah, no. My problem with the whole thing is that I hate seeing an organization bow to public pressure when said pressure is based on people wanting him to play not because he's good, but because of his beliefs.

Also if someone on my team at work was constantly doing the Jesus thing at me like that guy does, I would fucking hate working with him. I have to assume that's true for at least a segment of the other players.

So that makes you hate Tebow?  Again, I guess I don't get all the hatred.  He plays hard and works hard.  If the team opts to play him that's not his fault.

Hate is a strong word, I'd say not really. I don't like the guy and I don't like the way the team caved on playing him. If he was playing for my team I'd probably hate him, at least in the SPORTS HATE sense.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 27, 2011, 12:47:23 PM
I don't hate Tebow the man, even though he's a crazy jesus virgin or something.  Each to their own.

However I the story of Tim Tebow the NFL QB, and his mom's commercial.

Fuck all that jesus shit in my face.

While he's a great athlete that has the drive to play, he sucks as a QB.  SUCKS.

It's the media and the story that surrounds him that I loathe.  Why does he get all the excuses and the hand holding when he obviously sucks?

Here's what the Footballguys said about him:

Quote
I've said it since last year - I love Tim Tebow. Mostly because I love to see how he makes generally sensible fans and analysts completely lose their minds. We haven't seen this kind of blind, white hot passion with no basis for reason talk since Mike Vick was released from prison.

On one hand, you have the analysts that love to start the segment with, “Let’s be clear, in no way, shape or form do I want to diminish Tim Tebow and the fact that the Broncos won Sunday...” And then the guy goes on for ten minutes doing everything he can to diminish Tim Tebow and the Broncos win...

Dude. Get over yourself - we're not stupid. Just say what you mean. Don't try to sugarcoat it.

And then on the other side are the "Tebow can do no wrong and he's headed straight to Canton if you guys would just recognize his awesomeness" folks who are just as irrational.

The truth is that Tim Tebow Sunday gave the perfect Tebow performance. Denny Green would have loved it as he was who we thought he was. For 55 minutes, he was horribly inaccurate and looked overwhelmed. And when the game was on the line, he appeared to will his team to victory with great play (plus the benefit of a nice onside kick).

Where do I see it? I see a guy that will get better coupled with a guy that has an innate ability to lead his football team. He has the "it" factor that drives some fans and analysts crazy as it doesn't "compute" in their framework for evaluating players. I think he'll succeed at this level. In a best case scenario, he has the upside potential of becoming the QB version of Wes Welker. A guy that takes good but not great physicals and outworks the competition playing to his strengths and realizing where he fits in the system. Will he do that? I don't know. We'll see. All I know for sure is I'll continue to have fun watching most fans and analysts hyperventilate over him.

I agree with this mostly, except I hate the media circus around it and would rather get to other topics of discussion.

I also disagree with that it's all envy etc.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 27, 2011, 12:47:55 PM
I guess I haven't seen a lot of the bully pulpit behavior, but then again I don't watch a lot of TV so I probably wouldn't see it.  I just watch the games and that's about it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 27, 2011, 12:51:25 PM
John Fox did manage to get the Panthers to the Super Bowl with Jake Fucking Delhomme as the QB, so it isn't like he hasn't worked miracles with low skill guys before. He just needs a running game, two stud wide receivers, an offensive line and a defense and he'll be all set for SUPER BOWL QUARTERBACK TIM TEBOW!!!!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 27, 2011, 12:52:13 PM
I'm shocked that all the upstanding minded religious types on this site would hate Tebow.  :awesome_for_real:

I just hate him because of Florida.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on October 27, 2011, 12:56:35 PM
I'm shocked that all the upstanding minded religious types on this site would hate Tebow.  :awesome_for_real:

You have a Triforceresque quality for pointing out the obvious tendencies of this board.  

I'm willing to withhold judgment on his capabilities as a quarterback and a winner until the Broncos play someone other than the worst team in their worst setting.  I have my doubts that he'll be a consistent winner in the league, because like Vince "look at his record" Young, he won't be able to stay on the field.  But, perhaps he'll smarten up and alter his play style a bit more than a guy that got a 6 on the wonderlick test.

The religious shit is annoying.  His commercial was annoying.  His media coverage is annoying.  However, I'm interested how he ends up as a QB.  Call it morbid curiosity.  


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 27, 2011, 01:15:18 PM
I don't mind people disliking Tebow because he's a terrible player who's completely overexposed by the media.

I just always chuckle when people are like, BUT THE JESUS THING IS TOO MUCH!

Would it matter if he was good? Would it make it even that much more annoying if he was Drew Brees and went into religious commercials? What if he was Mormon? To me his religious affiliations are bothersome in that people around me tell me that I should like him because we share a faith, and ignore the fact that's terrible at his job.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 27, 2011, 01:24:56 PM
I don't mind people disliking Tebow because he's a terrible player who's completely overexposed by the media.

I just always chuckle when people are like, BUT THE JESUS THING IS TOO MUCH!

Would it matter if he was good? Would it make it even that much more annoying if he was Drew Brees and went into religious commercials? What if he was Mormon? To me his religious affiliations are bothersome in that people around me tell me that I should like him because we share a faith, and ignore the fact that's terrible at his job.

Frankly, even if the guy was the second coming of Johnny U, I would still dislike him. There are a lot of religious guys in the NFL, but none as blatant as him. Hell you can look at a ton of NFL and many other sports players and witness insane charitable acts that might even stem from a faith, but that is not their spotlight - their NFL game is.

Besides, the whole bible verses on the eye tape while at FL sealed his fate with me. Once I saw that, it was done.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on October 27, 2011, 01:27:38 PM
He plays hard and works hard.

I cannot read that and not think of gay steel workers.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 27, 2011, 01:28:46 PM
He plays hard and works hard.

I cannot read that and not think of gay steel workers.

(http://images.wikia.com/simpsons/images/f/fb/Mill-breaktime.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 27, 2011, 01:29:20 PM
He plays hard and works hard.

I cannot read that and not think of gay steel workers.

I was thinking more:

(http://www.whattodoabout.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/steely.jpg)

edit: to add more proof:

(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33271127/Steelers-mascot-McSteely.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on October 27, 2011, 01:31:02 PM
Ingmar had it right, but that Steeler would fit right in, I think.  :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 27, 2011, 02:00:11 PM
I don't mind people disliking Tebow because he's a terrible player who's completely overexposed by the media.

I just always chuckle when people are like, BUT THE JESUS THING IS TOO MUCH!

Kirt Warner came dangerously close to annoying me with the religious thing too.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: DLRiley on October 27, 2011, 02:14:01 PM
Well I live in maryland so all this t-bow nonsense, hasn't reached this side of pond. Coming from a redskin fan, boy all the hate is hilarious. We'd love a guy like t-bow over here. What he takes responsibility for his team and wills them to victory instead of hoping the game falls in his lap during the 3rd quarter? Oh my. All the hate is mostly because of the big J on his chest. Might as well be a target complete with "boom head shot wanker" when an insult is flung. If Tom Brady used the endzone as a pulpit we'd be up in arms, no one hates mediocre quarterbacks, we just ignore them till they silently get pooped out of the back end of the nfl, usually leaving a bad taste in the mouth for fans and a slightly sore anus.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 27, 2011, 02:18:34 PM
I don't mind people disliking Tebow because he's a terrible player who's completely overexposed by the media.

I just always chuckle when people are like, BUT THE JESUS THING IS TOO MUCH!

Kirt Warner came dangerously close to annoying me with the religious thing too.

He was well over the top for me. I don't give a shit what your beliefs are- STFU and do your job. That applies in every walk of life.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 27, 2011, 02:34:14 PM
He plays hard and works hard.

I cannot read that and not think of gay steel workers.

I was thinking more:

(http://www.whattodoabout.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/steely.jpg)

edit: to add more proof:

(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33271127/Steelers-mascot-McSteely.jpg)

That's awesome.  I'm laughing my ass off here at work.  All my staff is looking at me weird.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: stu on October 27, 2011, 05:53:19 PM
I listened to the radio broadcast of the Broncos - Dolphins game and it was three hours or the commentators slobbering and making excuses for Tebow. I was waiting for Bob Griese to disown his son for Tebow and then ask to kiss the Tim's neck, just a little, for like two seconds. But, you know what? The guy is exciting even when he's failing. I see him running around in the pocket like his pants are on fire and I want to see what the heck happens next. He's a hard worker and he's humble, but the Bible thumping grates.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Surlyboi on October 30, 2011, 03:10:43 PM
Ok, how much are the fins getting to throw games?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 30, 2011, 03:23:02 PM
Who told the Rams they were a football team?  Amazing.  Meanwhile, the Christian is being fed to the Lions.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on October 30, 2011, 03:23:17 PM
Ok, how much are the fins getting to throw games?

You watched that game and thought they threw it?  I can't believe the Giants only won that one by 3.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 30, 2011, 03:49:05 PM
Ok, how much are the fins getting to throw games?

You watched that game and thought they threw it?  I can't believe the Giants only won that one by 3.

It's like they play for a half, realize they are fucking up their plans, and go into the shitter.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on October 30, 2011, 03:49:23 PM
Teams roll up to the Dolphins and assume auto-win, then remember sometime during halftime it isn't ACTUALLY an auto-win and they need to play some football after all.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 30, 2011, 03:53:29 PM
Tebow wept.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on October 30, 2011, 03:56:29 PM
Looks like the Fins will still play hard.  So Sparano has that going for him.  Which is nice.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on October 30, 2011, 04:00:23 PM
The Fins have some players making effort, but their secondary can't cover anyone and the O-Line couldn't keep a team of 80 year old nuns off the QB.  Surprisingly, Moore didn't even play that poorly when he wasn't running for his life.  Hell, he even made a few nice runs when he *was* running for his life.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 30, 2011, 04:38:45 PM
Tebow wept.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBA-YKR7c1Y   :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Surlyboi on October 30, 2011, 05:21:56 PM
The Miami Dolphins: The NFL's slumpbuster.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 30, 2011, 06:59:35 PM
The the Cowboys decided to follow in the Saints footsteps and play like shit today.  :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 30, 2011, 07:56:50 PM
Philly had to punt :ye_gods: :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 30, 2011, 08:53:57 PM
Dallas is fucking terrible.  Giants wil lose to them.  We only lose to shitty teams.  suprised we won today


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 30, 2011, 10:08:57 PM
I was shocked to see the Steelers win, considering how mediocre Roethlisberger is.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 30, 2011, 10:27:03 PM
The Patriots have the worst pass defense in the league in terms of yards given up per game by a large margin.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on October 30, 2011, 10:30:39 PM
Yeah their corners are terrible and they were short handed to boot I believe.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Outlawedprod on October 31, 2011, 04:57:50 AM
For all the QB lovers here... I give you the Buddy Ryan philosophy.
http://smartfootball.com/grab-bag/the-gift-that-keeps-giving-buddy-ryans-playbook


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on October 31, 2011, 05:09:22 AM
Yeah their corners are terrible and they were short handed to boot I believe.

I agree.  Patrick Chung is the only decent DB on the team.  Love me some good safeties. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Outlawedprod on October 31, 2011, 05:24:09 AM
Tebow wept.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfHKs7HLUoc


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 31, 2011, 06:18:02 AM
Tebow wept.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RfHKs7HLUoc

I wept.   :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 31, 2011, 06:31:27 AM
Dallas at least has two winnable games coming up against Seattle and Washington. The game against Buffalo has the potential to be a total disaster.

I would be happy to be 5-5 after the next 3 and take a look around to see how bad the East looks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 31, 2011, 07:16:56 AM
If Eli and the Giants WR's can play as well as they did this week, they have a shot of staying in the game with the Pats.  That will also depend on whether or not we can get to Brady also on defense.  Giants do lead the league in sacks, so there is a shot.  Too bad I'll be traveling and I'll miss the game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 31, 2011, 07:46:14 AM
I barely got to see any football this Sunday because I had to go into goddamn work. Fuckers.

However, what I did see should bring tears all around.

Rothliesberger looked very good, but holy shit is that New England defense very very bad. They have no pass rush, and as a result, their secondary, which isn't very good anyway, looks terribad. The first two Steelers drives were Heath Miller getting the ball over the middle while wide fucking open. It's like the entire defense was the main character from Memento without the magic markers and homicidal tendencies - complete amnesia from play to play. The Steelers should have been up by a lot more points than they were in the end. Also, Wes Welker apparently didn't bother to show up.

HOLY SHIT, the Cowboys look fucking terrible. Just atrocious. How did this team win 3 games? I had to just fast-forward during the 3rd quarter it was so bad. Romo's arm did not seem to be listening to his head, like he was going through some massive seizure or his arm got possessed or something. This guy is NOT this bad a QB, and I can't even say it was down to the defense or coverage or the sacks. He was getting hit a lot, his guys were covered but his throws were just bad bad bad. The Cowboys defense looked just as inept. Every single first half throw Vick made the receiver was WIDE OPEN. The middle of the field was full of spaces where I receiver just walked into the open area and caught a laser pass.

The NFC East is going to be crazy this year. None of these teams are consistently good and when they are bad, they are "AAAAAAAAAAAAGHHH GET IT OFF MY FACE IT'S EATING MY EYEBALLS" bad. The Eagles and the Giants are the only ones I think can really challenge for the division but are so wildly inconsistent... it's a goddamn tossup. The Redskins getting blanked by a bad Buffalo defense? The Giants unable to run the ball? The EAGLES leading the league in RUSHING? The Cowboys... I don't even know what to say about the Cowboys. That team's talent level is easily 2 or 3 wins better than what they have in the standings.

The NFC South is just as wide open. None of those teams are playing their best week to week. I watched a bit of the Saints game and they were awful, especially their defense. Carolina might actually have the ability to pressure this division with a win streak. That shouldn't be happening.

San Fran has the West won. How the fuck did Arizona give up a 24-6 lead in two quarters to a Ravens team that couldn't throw a TD pass to save their lives? Seattle's Pete Carrol experiment continues to provide the LULZ.

Tim Tebow. 18-39 with 1 INT, 1 TD, 7 sacks and 3 fumbles? I cannot say enough how STUPID it was to pick this guy in the first round, pay him first round money and then start him in his second year on a team this bad. That's not saying he can't be better, but throwing him into this clusterfuck 2nd year? BEYOND RETARDED. You will slow any progress towards respectability this kid has by the hits his confidence has to take from getting facerolled like this. Fuck it, if you have no confidence in Orton, throw Claussen into the first. After all, he's supposed to be your #2. How bad does he have to be if TEBOW is the better option?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 31, 2011, 08:01:49 AM
If Eli and the Giants WR's can play as well as they did this week, they have a shot of staying in the game with the Pats.  That will also depend on whether or not we can get to Brady also on defense.  Giants do lead the league in sacks, so there is a shot.  Too bad I'll be traveling and I'll miss the game.

I think the Giants can win that game barring stupid turnovers. The NE Defense will keep them from going anywhere in the playoffs. It's just soooooooooooooooooooo bad.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 31, 2011, 08:02:23 AM
Romo's confidence has been blown.  You can see it in his eyes.  He's done as an NFL quarterback.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on October 31, 2011, 08:13:39 AM
Tim Tebow. 18-39 with 1 INT, 1 TD, 7 sacks and 3 fumbles? I cannot say enough how STUPID it was to pick this guy in the first round, pay him first round money and then start him in his second year on a team this bad. That's not saying he can't be better, but throwing him into this clusterfuck 2nd year? BEYOND RETARDED. You will slow any progress towards respectability this kid has by the hits his confidence has to take from getting facerolled like this. Fuck it, if you have no confidence in Orton, throw Claussen into the first. After all, he's supposed to be your #2. How bad does he have to be if TEBOW is the better option?

(Broncos fan stepping in.)
First, fuck Tebow and fuck that hype. The amount of echo chamber silliness that went on with him/is going on with him is ridiculous. He'd be a great RB or TE, but a QB? No. I don't even think it was too early... he just does not seem to have the instincts to play in the pro game. That being said, I think it speaks much more to the OC (McCoy) that Orton and Tebow were doing THAT bad. Plus, especially now with Llyod gone, no one that is elite. Of course, it's hard to be elite when your QB is overthrowing you by 10-15 yards.

The respectability came from the people sucking at the teet of christian ethical values bullshit and not any actual hope for being awesome in the pro game. The Tebowners are STILL making excuses for him.

THE BEST PART? We've now ruined any trade value out of either QB. WOO. It's going to be a long, long season. I am going to be very drunk many times this season.

BTW, You mean Quinn, not Clausen... Quinn is also very terrible.

EDIT: I also humbly submit that being sacked is the new "Tebowing".


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Outlawedprod on October 31, 2011, 08:43:45 AM
I also humbly submit that being sacked is the new "Tebowing".

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d823a4c8c/article/lions-defender-calls-tebow-a-joke-following-decisive-victory


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 31, 2011, 08:59:59 AM
Quote
Seattle's Pete Carrol experiment continues to provide the LULZ.


Agreed, provided that LULZ means 'causes me to scream obscenities at my television'. God I hate that fuckhead. The good news is more and more of the fanbase is coming around to my viewpoint.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 31, 2011, 09:43:47 AM
No, no. Accepting a guy who was on the run from the law was obviously the best decision.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 31, 2011, 09:56:57 AM
He was shitty the first time.  I can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to hire him again for the NFL.  He'll be fired within 2 years, I suspect.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 31, 2011, 10:54:49 AM
He was shitty the first time.  I can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to hire him again for the NFL.  He'll be fired within 2 years, I suspect.

This. I never understood why Seattle hired him other than the name. His college career masked a seriously bad NFL record, but you had to know someone would take the chance on him. Welcome to Spurrierville, Petey. Population: You.

Brady Quinn, that's right. Can he possibly be WORSE than Tebow? I can't imagine he could.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 31, 2011, 10:58:53 AM
He was shitty the first time.  I can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to hire him again for the NFL.  He'll be fired within 2 years, I suspect.

For who? Who in their right mind would take that job, honestly?

It's like a cancer on your resume (no offense to Way). I mean after Holmgren, Mora, and Carroll, it's going to be known as where coaching careers go to die.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 31, 2011, 11:09:07 AM
The Seahawks went to Super Bowl XL (2005 season) with Holmgren.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on October 31, 2011, 11:11:21 AM
And Holmgren can't get a coaching job now. He's president of the Browns or something. Tell me that's not a fate worse than death.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 31, 2011, 11:13:20 AM
He was shitty the first time.  I can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to hire him again for the NFL.  He'll be fired within 2 years, I suspect.
This. I never understood why Seattle hired him other than the name. His college career masked a seriously bad NFL record, but you had to know someone would take the chance on him. Welcome to Spurrierville, Petey. Population: You.
Peter Carroll's NFL coaching record before he was hired by the Seahawks wasn't that bad. In 4 seasons his teams basically won half their games and they went to the playoffs 2 years.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on October 31, 2011, 11:14:27 AM
Re: Holmgren-
You think he couldn't coach the Browns if he wanted to? He is running the entire team. His wife urged him to retire from coaching because of the incredibly long hours. He could have any number of jobs in the NFL if he wanted.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on October 31, 2011, 11:26:07 AM
And Holmgren can't get a coaching job now. He's president of the Browns or something. Tell me that's not a fate worse than death.

Holgren wanted to play the front office and get away from the Head Coach grind.  If he wanted to, he could get a head coaching job in a heart beat.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on October 31, 2011, 12:10:21 PM
And Holmgren can't get a coaching job now. He's president of the Browns or something. Tell me that's not a fate worse than death.

WHY MUST YOU HURT ME?  :why_so_serious:

Bad coaches, bad draft picks, bad fans, but fucking awesome stadium. So we got that going for us.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on October 31, 2011, 12:54:34 PM
Romo's confidence has been blown.  You can see it in his eyes.  He's done as an NFL quarterback.
They need to develop that running game to take the pressure off of him. Murray was a stud in the Eagles game too but they gave up on the running game way too soon.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on October 31, 2011, 12:56:29 PM
Hard to not give up on the Running Game when you're more and more behind. It went 14-0 pretty quickly and just got worse from there.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on October 31, 2011, 01:00:46 PM
Yeah, to be fair, they tried the running game, but anytime they had to pass the ball in the first half, Romo threw a goddamn brick. When you're down 21-0 and haven't had 5 first downs, you give up the run pretty easily. Of course, with the gashes Murray had been putting up and the lack of defense the Cowboys exhibited, I'd have been tempted to run just to keep the damn ball away from Vick and Shady McCoy.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on October 31, 2011, 01:48:19 PM
I don't think it has anything to do with him getting pressure.  He's gotten a reputation as a scrambler and guy that can get out of trouble.  He's lost whatever mental mojo he used to have in that department and that's killing his game. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on October 31, 2011, 10:40:53 PM
That Chiefs/Chargers game was about 5 times more entertaining then I ever thought it would be.


Something like 10 turnovers that game?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 01, 2011, 06:55:04 AM
And SD just turned it over again.

Thanks Rivers, without your help I wouldn't have crushed Haemish in fantasy this week!  :raspberry:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on November 01, 2011, 07:46:20 AM
Novak kicked me into a victory this week.  Woot.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: kaid on November 01, 2011, 07:55:56 AM
Re: Holmgren-
You think he couldn't coach the Browns if he wanted to? He is running the entire team. His wife urged him to retire from coaching because of the incredibly long hours. He could have any number of jobs in the NFL if he wanted.

I am pretty sure if he showed interest in being a coach again tons of teams would grab him. He got two different to superbowls on three occasions and has overall very good win loss records. There are a lot of hapless teams that would love him to come coach for them I just don't think he wants to do the coaching role at the moment and is doing more of the higher managment stuff.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 01, 2011, 08:02:40 AM
So we should say that coaching for the Seahawks broke his will to coach? I'm fine with that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 01, 2011, 08:16:32 AM
Goddamnit. The Fucking Chargers. I'm beginning to re-evaluate my take on Rivers vs. Rothliesberger. He isn't carrying this team, and this team is SOFT SOFT SOFT. Soft as the goddamn Stay Puft Marshmallow Man. Their receivers/tight ends are either nicked up or just not performing, and Rivers is forcing things. They only game they've won against a team with a winning record was their home game against KC and that was when KC was very very bad, and they still only won by 3 points. Rivers has been a turnover machine this year. The penalties this team has committed in the last two games are staggering. There are only 2 teams with losing records on their schedule for the rest of the year. They have 2 games against Oakland, Buffalo, Baltimore, Green Bay and Chicago as winning teams, and if they manage 3 wins out of that list, I'll be surprised. They should beat the Jags and Denver since both games are at home and both teams suck it. So their best case scenario, IMO, is 9-7. That might win the Western Division, but it'll be close.

KC is looking a lot better, at least defensively. They still have 2 games against Denver and one against Miami, but the rest of their schedule is just as brutal as San Diego's - Pittsburgh, New England, Green Bay, Chicago, the Jets and Oakland. 4 of those games are winnable (Chicago, Oakland, Jets and New England, though the last two are iffy). 9-7 or 10-6 are more likely than winning 11 games. Oakland has Denver, Minnesota and Miami as should wins and Green Bay, Chicago, Detroit, KC and San Diego as tough games - you'd expect them to win against San Diego since the Chargers can't stop the run and the Raiders can run well. Depending on how Palmer does and how McFadden's injury heals, they could win 4-6 games down the stretch, leaving them anywhere from an 8-8 to a 10-6. That division is actually going to be a race. If I had to pick anyone based on current form to win it, I'd nod to KC because of how bad San Diego is playing on the road.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 01, 2011, 09:27:56 AM
So we should say that coaching for the Seahawks broke his will to coach? I'm fine with that.

As I said before, it wasn't really his decision. I get the impression from listening to him that he would be just as happy coaching until he died in the film room one lonely night, but his wife shoved him out the door. The pity is he is a much better coach than he is a personnel director imo.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on November 01, 2011, 11:18:07 PM
And his Seattle years were pretty successful, all things considered.  I think it was really only his last season that was a letdown.  The man can coach.

On Rivers:  Something is wrong with him, in my opinion.  What is happening with him right now does not mesh with what we've seen from him over the last many years.  Hidden injury?  Psyche issues?  Don't know, but something just isn't the same.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bungee on November 02, 2011, 01:40:39 AM
On Rivers:  Something is wrong with him, in my opinion.  What is happening with him right now does not mesh with what we've seen from him over the last many years.  Hidden injury?  Psyche issues?  Don't know, but something just isn't the same.

Whatever issues he has, maybe not playing for my fantasy team EVER again will cure this.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on November 02, 2011, 06:08:38 AM
I know exactly what's wrong with Rivers - I took him in the first twenty picks in my pool.

I took Cutler as a backup around the sixth or seventh round, and he's out performed Rivers in 80% of his starts.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 02, 2011, 07:46:54 AM
That makes me /sadf.

Yeah, I'm benching Rivers this weekend for Andy FUCKING Dalton. Rivers is going against Green Bay while Dalton is taking on Tennessee. I just have no confidence that San Diego can perform against a good team, even with as many passing yards as Green Bay has been giving up. The Packers ARE making turnovers, and he's been real proficient at handing those out like candy this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 02, 2011, 09:16:45 AM
I don't know...Tennessee is tough on D, while GB is pretty terrible, and Rivers will be playing from behind all game long. He could roll up a bunch of garbage time points.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on November 02, 2011, 09:18:02 AM
Well shit, I've got a choice of Rivers going in to Greenbay, or Cutler going in to Philly on Monday night.

Not that it matters, Calvin Johnson is on a bye this week, so half my point production is gone anyways.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 02, 2011, 11:20:02 AM
Hooooooooooosh to the Raaaaydaaaaaaaaaahs

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501623_162-20128957/t.j-houshmandzadeh-moving-to-oakland-raiders/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501623_162-20128957/t.j-houshmandzadeh-moving-to-oakland-raiders/)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sir Fodder on November 02, 2011, 11:32:46 AM
Does anyone else get annoyed with the camera field of view during NFL broadcasts? My enjoyment of the game is seriously hindered when I cannot see what is going on during the play, to the point where I sometimes turn games off due to frustration. It seems like the narrow field of view is getting worse each year. I thought that HD broadcasting would ameliorate it to some extent, but no, not at all, its getting worse. Its not due to standard definition legacy- they can letterbox that like CBS does for SD sets.

On every network that broadcasts NFL games the camera view will start out showing all the players, even the defensive secondary, but as the ball is about to be snapped the idiots zoom in to the point where the secondary and often even linebackers are not visible, as the receivers head down field, they too move out of the field of view - this is the game, they are not showing it. I want to see the game. Duh. To compound matters, the way the field of view is framed makes things even worse; a sensible camera angle would pan so the quarterback appears right at the edge of the field of view, this way the screen area is maximized, instead as the ball is hiked and the play starts the camera pans so that there is a large amount of empty space behind the QB, inexcusably wasting screen area. Add on to this the annoyingly zoomed in parts in between plays, "ooh zits!" I want to see shots of fans (regular folks, not the idiot superfans that the idiot producers love so much) to get a sense of the life of the stadium, go in the fucking seats and corridors with a camera and talk to some fucking fans please, I want to see the players and coaches milling around and interacting, I could go on and on about this and the coverage, computer graphics and bleeps, and the fucking commercials everyone loves so much etc... Argh!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on November 02, 2011, 11:50:53 AM
Does anyone else get annoyed with the camera field of view during NFL broadcasts? My enjoyment of the game is seriously hindered when I cannot see what is going on during the play, to the point where I sometimes turn games off due to frustration. It seems like the narrow field of view is getting worse each year. I thought that HD broadcasting would ameliorate it to some extent, but no, not at all, its getting worse. Its not due to standard definition legacy- they can letterbox that like CBS does for SD sets.

On every network that broadcasts NFL games the camera view will start out showing all the players, even the defensive secondary, but as the ball is about to be snapped the idiots zoom in to the point where the secondary and often even linebackers are not visible, as the receivers head down field, they too move out of the field of view - this is the game, they are not showing it. I want to see the game. Duh. To compound matters, the way the field of view is framed makes things even worse; a sensible camera angle would pan so the quarterback appears right at the edge of the field of view, this way the screen area is maximized, instead as the ball is hiked and the play starts the camera pans so that there is a large amount of empty space behind the QB, inexcusably wasting screen area. Add on to this the annoyingly zoomed in parts in between plays, "ooh zits!" I want to see shots of fans (regular folks, not the idiot superfans that the idiot producers love so much) to get a sense of the life of the stadium, go in the fucking seats and corridors with a camera and talk to some fucking fans please, I want to see the players and coaches milling around and interacting, I could go on and on about this and the coverage, computer graphics and bleeps, and the fucking commercials everyone loves so much etc... Argh!

Lowered expectations, I guess. On replays you usually get to see the secondary / defensive backfield coverage (and receiver routes) and action.

But you are right that, especially since all these games are HD now, there is no excuse. It's just that the QB is the star so the entire focus is on him (or RB but NFL offense is almost entirely all about the passing game and running plays are just a foil or short yardage situations only or to eat up some clock). It goes along with the announcers that blather incessantly about every facet of the QB, replete with camera shots of his family watching on from the stands.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 02, 2011, 11:52:39 AM
Hooooooooooosh to the Raaaaydaaaaaaaaaahs

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501623_162-20128957/t.j-houshmandzadeh-moving-to-oakland-raiders/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501623_162-20128957/t.j-houshmandzadeh-moving-to-oakland-raiders/)

Boy, T.O. has got to be feeling mighty unloved about now. Not even the Raiders are taking a flier on him.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 02, 2011, 11:55:30 AM
The Arena League wants him :awesome_for_real:

Also T.O. is coming back from knee surgery so he's much more of a risk even ignoring his, uh, personality.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 02, 2011, 12:05:50 PM
And my Browns keep trundling along...  :oh_i_see:

http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2011/11/cleveland_browns_sign_rb_thoma.html



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 02, 2011, 12:42:13 PM
I'm just doing some quick looks at the Browns last couple of drafts.

2008: You traded away all your early picks. Guys you could have had at those slots - Chris Johnson, Jerod Mayo, Ray Rice, or Desean Jackson
2009: You missed on Robiskie, but you got a probowler center, and Massaquoi who is a very solid WR.
2010: You drafted your starting QB in the 3rd round. That's NEVER a good sign. TJ Ward and Montario Hardesty are proving to be pretty solid busts. For some reason you took Joe Haden in the first round when guys like CJ Spiller, Dez Bryant, Jahvid Best, and Devin McCourty were still on the board. That was a bad pick.
2011: Phil Taylor in the first round and I think he's really good. Jabal Sheard, also good. Greg Little's an ok WR, not fantastic.

Here's my problem. Notice how you haven't had a great running back? You draft Hardesty who sucks, but you pass on Spiller, Best, and in 2011 (unforgivably) passed on Mark Ingram. Your leading rusher is averaging 3.3 a carry and has no TDs. Meanwhile, Ingram has 3.9 a carry for 3 TDs as a fresh rookie.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 02, 2011, 12:46:29 PM
Sometime you have to wonder about the idiots making these picks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 02, 2011, 12:50:38 PM
A good cornerback is far more valuable than a RB as a first round pick. And there are quite a few very successful QBs drafted in the 3rd round or later. Tom Brady comes instantly to mind (6th round, IIRC).

Also, Spiller rarely gets on the field and Best is a concussion-fest, so I don't think they really missed out on them regardless.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 02, 2011, 12:54:33 PM
As for the QB being drafted in the 3rd round, I do think Colt McCoy is going to be a good starting NFL QB. He just needs a fucking team, and this isn't one. This is a collection of scrubs and busts.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on November 02, 2011, 12:56:10 PM
Spiller, Best and Bryant aren't really solid yet.  They haven't done much, and all have had injury problems.  They could end up being busts easily.

They're showing improvement in their second years, but again, injuries.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 02, 2011, 12:59:47 PM
Usually RBs are a good pick starting in the second/third round, right?  

I like to see the teams I like picking up skilled linemen in the first round.  

Edit:  I'm not all that sold on McCoy.  I'm a Texas fan and spent four years watching him play in college.  I just don't think he'll make it long term. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on November 02, 2011, 01:01:37 PM
Hooooooooooosh to the Raaaaydaaaaaaaaaahs

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501623_162-20128957/t.j-houshmandzadeh-moving-to-oakland-raiders/ (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-501623_162-20128957/t.j-houshmandzadeh-moving-to-oakland-raiders/)

Oh good, Carson can spend another year not throwing to him.   :grin:

Wait.. that only happens if there's a superstar on the team.  n/m.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 02, 2011, 01:02:59 PM
I'm just going to list the top 10 QBs in the league this year by throwing yards.

Brees, Newton, Rodgers, Brady, Roethlisberger, Stafford, Little Manning, Schaub, Rivers, Romo

Draft round - 2, 1, 1, 6, 1, 1, 1, 3, 1, undrafted

Brady's an anomoly at best. That's not even counting Manning the greater, who was a first rounder.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 02, 2011, 01:33:43 PM
2010: You drafted your starting QB in the 3rd round. That's NEVER a good sign.
Unless the quarterback's name is Joe Montana.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 02, 2011, 01:35:45 PM
Really? Montana? Any other all-stars you want to toss out that were drafted before the Reagan administration?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 02, 2011, 01:37:42 PM
I think the point is that Joe Montana and Tom Brady are the exceptions rather than the rule.  Typically good/great QBs are drafted in the first or second rounds.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 02, 2011, 01:40:10 PM
He said, and I quote, "You drafted your starting QB in the 3rd round. That's NEVER a good sign." Note the word "NEVER" in all caps :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 02, 2011, 01:41:44 PM
Dan Fouts was also a 3rd round pick. Roger Staubach was a 10th round pick.  Bart Starr was picked in the 17th round. And then there's Warren Moon...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 02, 2011, 01:43:35 PM
He said, and I quote, "You drafted your starting QB in the 3rd round. That's NEVER a good sign." Note the word "NEVER" in all caps :awesome_for_real:

I  :heart: the words NEVER and ALWAYS. They ruffles the feathers.

Also, let's try and focus on things that have happened since the invention of the internet and the obvious increase in information flow beyond 8mm flim.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 02, 2011, 01:44:48 PM
Dan Fouts was also a 3rd round pick. Roger Staubach was a 10th round pick.  Bart Starr was picked in the 17th round. And then there's Warren Moon...
Staubach was different, though, cause he went to the Navy after college. He would've been a first round pick otherwise.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 02, 2011, 01:47:37 PM
Who is Warren Moon?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 02, 2011, 01:48:32 PM
Also, let's try and focus on things that have happened since the invention of the internet and the obvious increase in information flow beyond 8mm flim.
The Internet was "invented" in 1974 :awesome_for_real:

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc675



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 02, 2011, 01:48:40 PM
Montana went to Notre Dame when Notre Dame was Notre Dame. You can't argue that he was in any way obscure or people might not have seen him play.

Fake edit: Ghost, you can't be serious?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 02, 2011, 01:50:54 PM
No, not serious. 

Montana wasn't obscure at all, but he also wasn't rated very highly.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 02, 2011, 01:57:41 PM
A few more:

Jeff Garcia was undrafted.

Ryan Fitzpatrick, who is turning out to be pretty good, was a 7th round pick.

Doug Flutie, 11th round.

It isn't really hard to find guys who were successful that weren't picked in the first round.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 02, 2011, 01:59:11 PM
Conversely, there is a metric shitton of 1st rounders who were horrible, as we discussed last week.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on November 02, 2011, 02:01:22 PM
He said, and I quote, "You drafted your starting QB in the 3rd round. That's NEVER a good sign." Note the word "NEVER" in all caps :awesome_for_real:

I  :heart: the words NEVER and ALWAYS. They ruffles the feathers.

Also, let's try and focus on things that have happened since the invention of the internet and the obvious increase in information flow beyond 8mm flim.

You so wanted to say either "immaterial difference" or "statistically insignificant".


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 02, 2011, 02:02:31 PM
Wait, are we getting ready to rehash something else?   :grin:

This is one of the reasons that I like football.  It's quite variable who is going to be good and who isn't, and a lot of it is predicated on work ethic.  There are examples of good quarterbacks that have made it into the league as low picks, and I certainly don't know these statistics, but I would surmise that the lion's share of the elite QBs were drafted in the first two rounds.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 02, 2011, 02:03:33 PM
Sure, for every great QB that wasn't a first round pick there are probably 2 that were, but there are also probably 16 first rounders that sucked.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on November 02, 2011, 02:20:24 PM
Well shit, I've got a choice of Rivers going in to Greenbay, or Cutler going in to Philly on Monday night.

Not that it matters, Calvin Johnson is on a bye this week, so half my point production is gone anyways.

Green Bay's secondary isn't very good.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 02, 2011, 02:41:24 PM
Even with all the passing yards the Packers have been giving up, their secondary is still enough to cause fantasy problems because of the INT's.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on November 02, 2011, 04:27:52 PM
I think Giants fans might still be slightly bitter the Giants drafted Simms over Montana. Joe would've been shitty with the Giants, though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on November 02, 2011, 09:28:00 PM
Does anyone else get annoyed with the camera field of view during NFL broadcasts? My enjoyment of the game is seriously hindered when I cannot see what is going on during the play, to the point where I sometimes turn games off due to frustration. It seems like the narrow field of view is getting worse each year. I thought that HD broadcasting would ameliorate it to some extent, but no, not at all, its getting worse. Its not due to standard definition legacy- they can letterbox that like CBS does for SD sets.

On every network that broadcasts NFL games the camera view will start out showing all the players, even the defensive secondary, but as the ball is about to be snapped the idiots zoom in to the point where the secondary and often even linebackers are not visible, as the receivers head down field, they too move out of the field of view - this is the game, they are not showing it. I want to see the game. Duh. To compound matters, the way the field of view is framed makes things even worse; a sensible camera angle would pan so the quarterback appears right at the edge of the field of view, this way the screen area is maximized, instead as the ball is hiked and the play starts the camera pans so that there is a large amount of empty space behind the QB, inexcusably wasting screen area. Add on to this the annoyingly zoomed in parts in between plays, "ooh zits!" I want to see shots of fans (regular folks, not the idiot superfans that the idiot producers love so much) to get a sense of the life of the stadium, go in the fucking seats and corridors with a camera and talk to some fucking fans please, I want to see the players and coaches milling around and interacting, I could go on and on about this and the coverage, computer graphics and bleeps, and the fucking commercials everyone loves so much etc... Argh!

Only nerds like me (and you) want to see All 22 footage.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 03, 2011, 06:00:28 AM
My comment is that if you want coverage of the whole field, you need to go to the stadium.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on November 03, 2011, 06:02:52 AM
My comment is that if you want coverage of the whole field, you need to go to the stadium.

Its hard to see the field with 20 drunken idiots jumping up and down in front of you.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 03, 2011, 06:10:52 AM
My comment is that if you want coverage of the whole field, you need to go to the stadium.

Its hard to see the field with 20 drunken idiots jumping up and down in front of you.

Please don't tell me you're one of those people who tells fans to sit down on 3rd down at a football game?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 03, 2011, 06:28:50 AM
I definitely am.  Football was not made to be watched from a standing position.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on November 03, 2011, 07:26:56 AM
My comment is that if you want coverage of the whole field, you need to go to the stadium.

Its hard to see the field with 20 drunken idiots jumping up and down in front of you.

Please don't tell me you're one of those people who tells fans to sit down on 3rd down at a football game?

I'm one of those people that doesn't go to the game in the first place, so no, I don't.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 03, 2011, 07:46:14 AM
My opinion is that if you don't like to stand, it's fine to stay home. If you don't like to stand, it's also acceptable to buy the club level seats and sit there with the other doctors and lawyers who go to game for client entertainment.

For the rest of us? Stand up on 3rd down and cheer you bunch mooks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 03, 2011, 08:02:16 AM
My opinion is that if you don't like to stand, it's fine to stay home. If you don't like to stand, it's also acceptable to buy the club level seats and sit there with the other doctors and lawyers who go to game for client entertainment.

For the rest of us? Stand up on 3rd down and cheer you bunch mooks.

Sit yer hooligan ass down!   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on November 03, 2011, 08:05:57 AM
Man, you'd hate going to a game and being stuck by me. I'm so drunk by the 3rd quarter, I barely know what's going on. All I know is YELL A LOT and WOOOO and high five strangers.... WOOOOOO


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 03, 2011, 08:10:08 AM
Man, you'd hate going to a game and being stuck by me. I'm so drunk by the 3rd quarter, I barely know what's going on. All I know is YELL A LOT and WOOOO and high five strangers.... WOOOOOO


Shhhhh.  Don't tell anyone, but I'm just giving Paelos shit.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on November 03, 2011, 08:13:59 AM
My opinion is that if you don't like to stand, it's fine to stay home. If you don't like to stand, it's also acceptable to buy the club level seats and sit there with the other doctors and lawyers who go to game for client entertainment.

For the rest of us? Stand up on 3rd down and cheer you bunch mooks.

Its actually far less to do with standing as such and more to the fact that I hate loud places. Stadiums are just too loud for me.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 03, 2011, 08:47:00 AM
My opinion is that if you don't like to stand, it's fine to stay home. If you don't like to stand, it's also acceptable to buy the club level seats and sit there with the other doctors and lawyers who go to game for client entertainment.

For the rest of us? Stand up on 3rd down and cheer you bunch mooks.

Its actually far less to do with standing as such and more to the fact that I hate loud places. Stadiums are just too loud for me.

They are too rich for my blood... noise is arbitrary.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 03, 2011, 08:50:44 AM
I love a good stadium game. Nothing beats being in a wild atmosphere when you are winning or the game is close and you are on Defense.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 03, 2011, 11:37:12 AM
Tickets are ridiculously expensive for NFL games, even for seats where you can't see shit.

(http://sports.popcrunch.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/obstructed.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on November 03, 2011, 06:22:44 PM
I  :heart: Architecture fail pics.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on November 03, 2011, 06:25:51 PM
That pic makes me mad. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 06, 2011, 03:12:00 PM
Denver vs. Oakland is a good game so far.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 06, 2011, 03:40:13 PM
Denver vs. Oakland is a good game so far.


Both late games are good. Pats v Giants is delivering as well.

EDIT: BAHAHAHA! Pats not having a pass defense is really murdering them this year. Dear lord!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on November 06, 2011, 04:23:27 PM
Grats to the Fins, with a solid win.  Moore and Reggie Bush(!) had excellent games. 

The Jets win!  Didn't see that coming, but they just about had to to stay in playoff contention.  Cue Jim Mora's "Playoff?!"

Falcons cruise to victory.  Looks like moving up in the draft to get Julio Jones was a great great move. 

Titans go down after leading most of the game.  Ack.  Um...shhhh...the Bengals are a GOOD team.  At least Chris Johnson got some yards.  Maybe he's breaking out of his ganja-fueled funk. 






Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 06, 2011, 04:24:14 PM
Also, tebow, Tebow, TEBOW, TEBOW!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 06, 2011, 07:41:49 PM
So what's the 49ers' magic number?  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on November 06, 2011, 08:04:08 PM
So what's the 49ers' magic number?  :awesome_for_real:

3

And the Colts are in the Luck driver's seat!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on November 06, 2011, 08:50:40 PM
The Ravens-Steelers game tonight was flat out some of the best football I've ever seen.  A complete  chess match for the first 3 quarters, with the 4th turning into a simply a force of will.   Phenomenal.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 07, 2011, 12:05:02 AM
So what's the 49ers' magic number?  :awesome_for_real:
3
I think it's 4 unless the 49ers 3 wins are against the Seahawks and Cardinals twice, then the Niners would own the tiebreakers.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on November 07, 2011, 12:46:14 AM
I'm pretty sure the number is ZERO, because that is how much chance any other team in the NFC west has.  Really, it's just academic at this point.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on November 07, 2011, 06:02:13 AM
Also, tebow, Tebow, TEBOW, TEBOW!  :why_so_serious:

So you watched the Fox aftergame as well? 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2011, 07:41:25 AM
Also, tebow, Tebow, TEBOW, TEBOW!  :why_so_serious:

So you watched the Fox aftergame as well? 

Haha, yeah.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 07, 2011, 08:13:43 AM
I wish I hadn't been so tired last night, because I kept falling to sleep during the Ravens/Steelers game. What I saw was damn good smashmouth football, but fuck I got tired for some reason. Flacco did what Flacco does... has good days and bad days. Yesterday was a good day. He could have had a LOT better day if his wideouts not named Boldin would stop dropping easy passes. I think there were two or three important drops, at least one for a TD that should have been catches. My takeaway is that these two teams could easily be set for an AFC Championship rematch... or could flame out first round depending on which team shows up. It's a sure bet they'll both make the playoffs though.

The Bengals I'm still not convinced about. Yes, beating the Titans in Nashville was a very big positive step, and Dalton continues to impress - especially with not turning the ball over. But I won't be convinced they are a playoff worthy team until they make it through the next stretch. They face Pittsburgh twice, Houston and Baltimore 4 of the next 5 games. If they go 2-2 on that stretch, they are a contender. And God help them if they lose to Cleveland. They will need to win every winnable game like that left. The Titans, meanwhile, have got a schedule full of teams that could destroy them or lose horribly to them (inconsistent teams like Atlanta, New Orleans and Buffalo). Houston has pretty much won that division barring a complete collapse.

The whole AFC playoff picture is a mess thanks to the shittastic AFC West. I expected the Chargers to lose to the Packers, but both the Raiders and the Chiefs losing to REALLY BAD TEAMS has made that division a nightmare. It's almost certain there won't be a wild card coming out of that division. The Chiefs losing that badly to the Fins at home for fuck's sake is only matched in  :ye_gods: -ness by the Raiders letting Tebow throw 2 TD passes. Palmer threw another 3 INT's. Guess that rust is still there and at least it's becoming clear the Raiders will only lose 1 first round pick instead of 2.

Buffalo, the Jets and New England - well, it's likely that two of these teams will make the playoffs, maybe three. But I'll be damned if I could pick one to bet on. New England's defense showed up for a half yesterday, only to absolutely pack it in in the last five minutes. Meanwhile the Bills offense never showed up, the Jets defense manhandled them. The Jets finally found their running game, which enabled Sanchez to not lose them the game. For all three teams to make it into the playoffs, Cincy will have to fall apart (still something I find likely) and neither Tennessee or any of the AFC West teams will have to find some consistency.

The Packers defense is living and dying by the turnover. That's going to bite them in the ass come playoff time. I hope they get their shit together before then, or we will see some seriously whacked out playoff scores. And I still am dying to see the Thanksgiving game with the Lions - it ought to be epic. Though now it looks like the 49ers are going to be pressing hard for the #2 seed behind Green Bay. Their toughest games left are against the Giants next week, at Baltimore and home to the Steelers. The rest of their schedule is against their own division, the crappiest set of teams in football. I could easily see them going 13-3 with that schedule because the Giant game is at home. The Giants showed up late against the Pats but they also held that Pats offense to three points through 3 quarters. If I was a Giants fan, I'd be worried about their typical late season collapse, because if Philly keeps winning, they will challenge for the division. The Cowboys though - if Miles Austin is hurt for any length of time, they are going to keep struggling but at least their schedule doesn't have any of the killer teams on it.

The Eagles/Bears game tonight has huge playoff implications. I am torn about whether to watch it or not.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on November 07, 2011, 09:47:50 AM
Also, tebow, Tebow, TEBOW, TEBOW!  :why_so_serious:

So you watched the Fox aftergame as well? 

Haha, yeah.

Quite pathetic I knew exactly what you had seen.

I loved the departing TEBOW as they were closing out the show, too.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Outlawedprod on November 07, 2011, 03:23:12 PM
Jets finally found their running game, which enabled Sanchez to not lose them the game. For all three teams to make it into the playoffs, Cincy will have to fall apart (still something I find likely) and neither Tennessee or any of the AFC West teams will have to find some consistency.

File this under Sanchez highlight of the year. Maybe career.  This one is going to get replayed awhile on bloopers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r2iFLQqpDlI


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 07, 2011, 04:04:16 PM
AWESOME!  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on November 07, 2011, 05:28:36 PM
ahahahaha

 :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on November 07, 2011, 06:45:51 PM
LOL Man I needed that! Thanks Shychez!



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 07, 2011, 10:46:08 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRBDMMVctu8

 :drill:
Factory of sadness.... I laff'd way more than I should have.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on November 08, 2011, 06:26:51 AM
Why I hate the Philladelphia Eagles:

Bears (4-3) go in to Philly (3-4) apparently a major underdog.

Bears beat Philly in a great game.

Sports radio next morning: 15 straight minutes of analyzing how Philly managed to lose.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 08, 2011, 07:47:08 AM
Philly lost because the Bears beat the shit out of them on defense. Several times the linebacker core of the Bears made incredible plays on the ball.

Also, Cutler looks good. Shockingly, he's not running for his life now. I think Haemish had a stroke somewhere.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 08, 2011, 07:47:09 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tRBDMMVctu8

 :drill:
Factory of sadness.... I laff'd way more than I should have.

OMG... that was funnier than Flinchez AND the Eagles losing another lead in the 4th quarter.

It appears the NFC East teams have decided to just hand the goddamn division to the Giants. The Eagles are NOT a worse team than the Cowboys, they just happen to be playing like one. How do you 1) lose to the Bears and Jay Cutler after leading in the 4th AND 2) not manage to sack Cutler one fucking time? My zombie grandmother could sack Cutler at least once based on this season's performance. Do the NFC East and NFC South teams just WANT the wild cards to come out of the NFC North? We know they aren't coming out of the goddamn West. Of the teams that could be challenging for wild card spots (Atlanta, Tampa Bay, Dallas, Detroit, Chicago and Philly), Detroit is the only one I'd consider a solid contender. The rest have been so inconsistent or just plain bad at the worst times.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 08, 2011, 07:48:40 AM
I still think Dallas wins the NFC East.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sir Fodder on November 08, 2011, 11:55:53 AM
My comment is that if you want coverage of the whole field, you need to go to the stadium.

The nearest stadium is over 100 miles from me, and its the Cardinals.

THE CARDINALS 100 MILES AWAY, not to mention I am broke.

What the fuck Paelos?

You actually like that zoomed in camera view to where you cannot see players playing the game, you know... during the plays? For my part, I'd like to actually see the game being played.

I just stumbled across this:  The Footage the NFL Won't Show You
Despite Its TV Ubiquity, the League Won't Share "All-22" Footage; Second-Guessing the Coach (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203716204577015903150731054.html) Witholding the all 22 footage, ahh wtf? This makes no sense to me, rage and despair, RAGE. I wanna punt a ball into that Charlie Casserly asshole as he goes to watch the all 22 footage each week.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 08, 2011, 12:33:20 PM
So you are complaining about your free entertainment value then?

I see. Were I involved at all in the game side of this, knew that you were broke and thus not benefiting the advertising on the TV broadcasts, I would deliver this message to you bluntly.

Life sucks, get a fucking helmet.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 08, 2011, 01:23:27 PM
Sometimes the NFL makes me really fucking sad. The All-22 is one of those times.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 08, 2011, 01:47:46 PM
Well, it looks as if the Pats cut Albert Haynesworth (http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/33952/pats-jets-ii-haynesworth-made-an-example).  He's turned into an enormous piece of shit in the past 4 years. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 08, 2011, 01:50:57 PM
I have theorized that his exit from the team building is what caused the near Earth asteroid scare.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on November 08, 2011, 01:57:44 PM
Well, it looks as if the Pats cut Albert Haynesworth (http://espn.go.com/blog/afceast/post/_/id/33952/pats-jets-ii-haynesworth-made-an-example).  He's turned into an enormous piece of shit in the past 4 years. 

Dislike him.  Perfect example of playing for a contract then completely fucking tanking it.  Stomping incident didn't help either.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 08, 2011, 02:00:52 PM
So you are complaining about your free entertainment value then?

I see. Were I involved at all in the game side of this, knew that you were broke and thus not benefiting the advertising on the TV broadcasts, I would deliver this message to you bluntly.

Life sucks, get a fucking helmet.

This is one of those times where I see someone go all over-the-top-total-twat mode, and I don't understand why. They have the All 22 footage, the technology exists to deliver it, and there's demand. Why shouldn't people complain that they can't get it?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 08, 2011, 02:05:15 PM
And there's also the sexual assault, regular assault, driving over 100 miles per hour and hitting someone, and I believe something else about guns, but I couldn't find it in my Google brain.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 08, 2011, 03:35:48 PM
This is one of those times where I see someone go all over-the-top-total-twat mode, and I don't understand why. They have the All 22 footage, the technology exists to deliver it, and there's demand. Why shouldn't people complain that they can't get it?

Because if you literally invest nothing in the product, you shouldn't bitch about it?

If you don't like the free coverage to the sport, don't watch it.

Also, it seems like a really stupid thing to get upset about or even worry about it. It's like complaining your diamond shoes are too tight.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 08, 2011, 03:37:17 PM
This site is all about bitching.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 08, 2011, 03:45:04 PM
Oh I know, Sir Fodder just asked me WTF, so I told him.  :grin:

EDIT: Also, the NFL will eventually release that kind of information for a fee. They are just teasing the market. They are already doing surveys on whether or not fans would pay for it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 08, 2011, 03:54:11 PM
This site is all about bitching.

What???

 :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 08, 2011, 08:41:29 PM
Oh I know, Sir Fodder just asked me WTF, so I told him.  :grin:

EDIT: Also, the NFL will eventually release that kind of information for a fee. They are just teasing the market. They are already doing surveys on whether or not fans would pay for it.

I would pay for a package with alternative channels with different cameras and multiple replays along with webcasts and such. Maybe $10 a month?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 09, 2011, 06:56:18 AM
Personally, I wish the NFL and the content providers would wise up and start realizing how much money they are leaving on the table. Instead of $300 for Sunday Ticket, why can't I pay like $10 a month for only Packers' games? Throw in an add-on that lets me have those extra camera angles for $5 a month, maybe even another $5 for On-Demand style replays of any games I want after the fact. Sure, it's nice to get that $300 or so upfront, but with the plethora of digital outlets into people's homes, you could chop and charge the shit out of people in small dribs and drabs that they don't ever notice. It's the MMO F2P/DLC model turned to 11.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 09, 2011, 01:19:13 PM
There's probably something in their collective agreement that won't allow that.  I mean, how else are the Cardinals or Jaguars going to get watched?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 09, 2011, 01:24:34 PM
That reminds me of another thing that sticks in my craw about the NFL (and really all the big sports leagues) - TV blackouts on regional coverage. The TV revenue is where the money is. There is no reason whatsoever that I should be unable to watch a game because it's "not in my region." If I pay the extra money to Comcast or DirecTV for sports channels, it shouldn't matter what region I'm in or if the stadium is full.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 09, 2011, 01:31:11 PM
I do agree with you that they are being short sighted about the potential for making money.  I suspect that as the internet becomes more ingrained in everything that we do that we will eventually see changes as to how these things are covered. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on November 09, 2011, 06:35:37 PM
That reminds me of another thing that sticks in my craw about the NFL (and really all the big sports leagues) - TV blackouts on regional coverage. The TV revenue is where the money is. There is no reason whatsoever that I should be unable to watch a game because it's "not in my region." If I pay the extra money to Comcast or DirecTV for sports channels, it shouldn't matter what region I'm in or if the stadium is full.

I can understand, to an extent, blacking out games which are not nearby. Even if I disagree with it.

The one that is a fucking travesty (that really only applies for baseball these days) is that if you live within a certain distance of the stadium and the game does not sell out, they can black out YOUR LOCAL TEAM to give you an "incentive" to drive 75 miles to the stadium and pay 50 bucks or more for a ticket.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 09, 2011, 06:46:29 PM
As any Raiders fan can tell you, it absolutely applies to football as well.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on November 09, 2011, 06:57:02 PM
As any Raiders fan can tell you, it absolutely applies to football as well.  :why_so_serious:

Ahh I forgot about the teams that have attendance woes. I live in an area where the two closest teams can be shit-tastic and seem to always fill up their stadiums (Chicago and Indy) and the next closest (St Louis) is not a team anyone wants to watch anyway. I am also a Packers fan, and the Packers haven't had a non-sell out game since my parents were in jr high elementary school.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Outlawedprod on November 10, 2011, 08:56:02 AM
Eagles tailgate rapper
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RswBa2qel2I


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 11, 2011, 07:06:58 AM
How does Norv Turner still have a job?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 11, 2011, 08:26:35 AM
How does Norv Turner still have a job?
I ask myself that several times a season. It is a mystery. Also, I am pretty sure Rivers is hurt. His throwing motion looks totally different. I bet he has shoulder surgery after the season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 11, 2011, 08:29:48 AM
He still seems to have decent arm strength, though. Highlights showed him throwing a number of deep balls including that now infamous play to Jackson.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 11, 2011, 08:36:40 AM
How does Pete Carroll still have a job.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 11, 2011, 08:48:57 AM
Please keep asking that. Have everyone you know ask it. Maybe it will seep into Paul Allen's head eventually.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 11, 2011, 08:55:42 AM
That may go down as the stupidest hire in NFL history. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 11, 2011, 09:02:39 AM
What the fuck is wrong with Vincent Jackson is a better question. He looked like he didn't give two shits to be out on the field last night. That INT in the end zone, he seemed to be jogging down the whole way, not even bothering to look if he was going to be targeted or not. To be fair, there were at least 3 balls into the endzone that Rivers should never have thrown - the first TD to Vincent Brown, the 2nd TD to Brown that got overturned on a Mickey Mouse bullshit rule, and the one to Jackson. But you know, if Jackson had bothered to make even minimal effort to find the ball and make a play on it, that might have been a TD. He's starting to resemble Randy Moss in his Oakland days - out to collect a paycheck.

Of course, Rivers spent most of the night on his back, and that's likely to happen when 2/5th of your o-line goes down during the game. But the fact that Turner never managed to get him enough blocking to make passes is telling. I have no idea how Turner still has a head coaching job either. His teams just never seem to have the fire in their belly.

Oakland, meanwhile, has a really good running game, and Denarius Moore looks a legit deep threat. Palmer did well enough, but when you only have to throw the ball 20 times because Michael Bush is facerolling the San Diego D, well, he better look good. I can't say the Chargers are done, but losing 4 straight, including 2 straight at home, that's not getting you to the playoffs. Their remaining schedule isn't soft - they still have Baltimore and Chicago, and they still have to go to Oakland and Detroit. Maybe it's the injuries that are killing them, but I think this may be Turner's last season in San Diego. Oh, and Rivers has taken the 2nd most sacks in the league (25) behind the Rapist (26) and tied with Sam Bradford. There may be a clue there about his performance.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 11, 2011, 09:04:39 AM
It's only a matter of time until Palmer gets his feet back under him.  He was in a hard spot, coming in cold to a new playbook and new players. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on November 11, 2011, 09:06:21 AM
Oakland, meanwhile, has a really good running game, and Denarius Moore looks a legit deep threat. Palmer did well enough, but when you only have to throw the ball 20 times because Michael Bush is facerolling the San Diego D, well, he better look good. I can't say the Chargers are done, but losing 4 straight, including 2 straight at home, that's not getting you to the playoffs. Their remaining schedule isn't soft - they still have Baltimore and Chicago, and they still have to go to Oakland and Detroit. Maybe it's the injuries that are killing them, but I think this may be Turner's last season in San Diego. Oh, and Rivers has taken the 2nd most sacks in the league (25) behind the Rapist (26) and tied with Sam Bradford. There may be a clue there about his performance.

That's therapists, Mr. Connery.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 11, 2011, 09:09:51 AM
That's not what your mother said, Trebeck!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 11, 2011, 11:20:30 AM
That may go down as the stupidest hire in NFL history. 

Matt Millen says hi.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 11, 2011, 11:24:55 AM
That may go down as the stupidest hire in NFL history. 

Shall we go down another Browns list?  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 13, 2011, 12:23:02 PM
Tebow has completed 2 passes and yet the Broncos are still likely to win the game.

If it stays at 2 passes is that a record fewest passes completed by the winning team in the Super Bowl era?  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 13, 2011, 12:51:09 PM
Two passes completed, one of which is for a touchdown.

Edit:  And he finished with a 102.6 QB rating.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 13, 2011, 01:46:19 PM
Two passes completed, one of which is for a touchdown.
The TD pass was a perfect throw too.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 13, 2011, 01:53:06 PM
He the Cowboys are over .500! That game was like the Super Bowl beatdown of yore.

Oh and the Eagles are laughably bad. They basically have to win out.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 13, 2011, 02:55:16 PM
Oh Browns... oh ... fuck it I got nothing.  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on November 13, 2011, 03:00:21 PM

If it stays at 2 passes is that a record fewest passes completed by the winning team in the Super Bowl era?  :awesome_for_real:


Ken Stabler went 1-6 in a win in 1981.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 13, 2011, 03:50:17 PM
Ravens? wtf? Still some minutes, but seriously...

And jeebus have mercy what got into the Bears? T-day football is not looking like I was last month, at all.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 13, 2011, 04:09:10 PM
It's like Christmas came early for the Cowboys! Thanks, Manning-face!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 13, 2011, 04:17:21 PM
All the NFC West teams won today :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 13, 2011, 04:20:25 PM
LOLRavens. WTC.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on November 13, 2011, 05:17:56 PM
The Dolphins are on a winning streak, thus ensuring they now have no hope of getting Luck.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on November 13, 2011, 05:19:28 PM
LOLRavens. WTC.

This god damn team.    :argh:

My favorite twitter quote so far.

 #Ravens will obviously crush the Bengals and 49ers no problem, but that's followed by a tough two game stretch against CLE and IND.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on November 13, 2011, 05:31:49 PM
Jesus Christ, the Lions shit the bed today.  Are they going to pull a Buffalo and start losing?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on November 13, 2011, 06:12:06 PM
It's like Christmas came early for the Cowboys! Thanks, Manning-face!

It was a good day for the Cowboys, but Eli still had a pretty good game against a solid defense.  Take away one or two of the shit-stupid errors, or one of those dropped passes being caught, and it could have gone the other way.  One of those interceptions was Eli being bad, but the other was Manningham ditching on a timed route.

San Fran just played a solid game, and really capitalized on the couple of plays where either Manning or the defense (which was great 95% of the day) were distracted by shiny objects or something.

Great football game.


I wish I saw more of the Bears game.  I mean, the beginning of the season they looked like a dysfunctional bunch of chumps and now they're coming off as world destroyers.

Edit:

Giants/Cowboys twice at the end of the season?  Should be great games the way things are going!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 13, 2011, 07:11:56 PM
All the NFC West teams won today :awesome_for_real:


This needs repeating....  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on November 13, 2011, 10:04:09 PM
How does Norv Turner still have a job?

Because he's Norvelous.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bungee on November 14, 2011, 12:41:27 AM
Great day of football. Sanchize was his normal "I can't throw deep or accurate nor am I able to read a D" self. The Ravens shit the bed the week after their Superbowl (Gatorade shower and all).
The Texans really seem legit even without Andre, but I don't think their D is up to the task of going deep in the playoffs.

And I have to say, 49ers. WTF... I know shit about this team, never saw a game up to now. What is it about them? Someone enlighten me...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on November 14, 2011, 12:52:54 AM
I think the thing with the 49ers is that they finally have a coach that is worth a shit.  The had the roster to be good last year too (they were the popular pick in the NFC West before last season started), but Singletary couldn't coach for a damn.  Some stability for Alex Smith doesn't hurt, either.

And you know what pisses me off?  Not that I am fully aboard the Luck Train, but the goddamn Colts sure as shit are going to earn the right to pick him.  Like having one quarterback-for-the-ages wasn't enough, you get to go from one to the next without missing a beat.  Now I doubly hope he's a bust.  I like Peyton Manning, but FUCK the Colts.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 14, 2011, 01:30:15 AM
And you know what pisses me off?  Not that I am fully aboard the Luck Train, but the goddamn Colts sure as shit are going to earn the right to pick him.  Like having one quarterback-for-the-ages wasn't enough, you get to go from one to the next without missing a beat.  Now I doubly hope he's a bust.  I like Peyton Manning, but FUCK the Colts.
The Colts drafted Elway too :drill: and there are rumors going around that Luck's father floated the idea that Andrew might, depending on who picks him, refuse to play for the team that picks him too :awesome_for_real: ... though if it is the Colts I don't see why he wouldn't want to play for them.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on November 14, 2011, 01:37:48 AM
Really, right now, the Colts are the only team even in the running.  They are two games "up" on Carolina, Miami, St. Louis and Minnesota.  No reason to think that any of those four teams won't win at least one more game.  While I can see the Colts maybe winning a game, can they win three?  I don't see it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 14, 2011, 01:44:15 AM
And I have to say, 49ers. WTF... I know shit about this team, never saw a game up to now. What is it about them? Someone enlighten me...
They've had a good young defense for a few years now with perhaps the best linebacking group in the NFL but their offense has been inconsistent at best with the offense coordinator position being a regular turnstile and their QB Alex Smith getting a lot of flak, fairly or unfairly, for being the #1 overall pick in 2005 and not delivering.

The previous coach, Mike Singletary, tried to emphasize "smash mouth football" with good defense and a strong running game -- i.e. the way his Bears teams played -- but was unable for whatever reason to make that happen. Harbaugh, meanwhile, was building the same type of team at Stanford. Despite all the attention Andrew Luck has been getting Stanford was a run first team under Harbaugh (and is the same under new coach David Shaw). Harbaugh then joins the 49ers and without the benefit of a preseason is somehow able to get them to play his type of football to great success (so far). Given how similar the roster is from last year's and assuming the Niners continue to play well they are perhaps the best example in recent memory of how important coaching is to the success of a team.

Edit: trim quote


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 14, 2011, 08:09:40 AM
Another Sunday, another recap.

Watched New Orleans and Atlanta play a good game, one that was totally blown by two WTF's? One, how does the Atlanta kicker miss that last kick? There were some real bad missed kicks all over the place yesterday, like the Nick Folk kick in the Jets/Pats game (that made no difference). Then, Mike Smith WTF? 4th and 1 on your own goddamn 29 yard line and you go for it? FOR FUCK'S SAKE, WHY? You gain nothing by getting that 4th down. You still have to go another 40 yards after that to get in field goal range. Your defense has actually done a good job most of the game. Darren Sproles got shut out most of the day (my fantasy teams curse you for that). I realize it's the Saints and you want to keep the ball out of his hands, but that's fucking nuts. High risk, little reward and you lost the game and maybe the division because of it.

Best game of the day was the Giants/49ers game. Both teams played well most of the game, and it really was just a few mistakes and good coaching that won that game. The onside kick was risky, but it was executed BRILLIANTLY. The Giants not only weren't ready for it, they really weren't ready for a kick that good. I really dug the way the 49ers offense ran yesterday. Good, efficient passes that shredded the Giants zones more times than not, kept possession and moved the chains. The Giants even had a chance to win it, they just needed one more 4th down. Eli made some really DUMB throws about two or three times (throwing wild off his back foot to avoid a sack) but he mostly played well. His receivers had a few too many drops, including Cruz with a drop 10 yards away from any other player on the defense. Did you know Alex Smith is 7th in the league in QB rating, just head of The Rapist?

The Jets... oh, the Jets. The Pats are a terrible defense. Their secondary is horrible. So apparently that means you get overconfident and think you can pass the ball like the Manning-led Colts. No, you fucking morons, RUN THE BALL. GROUND AND POUND, DIPSHITS. I don't know why this is such a hard concept for them. Run the ball. Sanchez is not the kind of QB that will win you the game on his own. If he throws it 30+ times a game, YOU'RE DOING IT WRONG. It wasn't like the Pats were stopping the run. 25 attempts, 4.4 yards a carry. That's a solid average, so run the ball 5-10 more times, keep the ball out of Brady's hands, collect your W. I swear, coaching arrogance seems to be the Jets' biggest weakness. Their defense is good enough to win games for them, if they aren't on the field 30+ minutes a game.

I would just like to go on record now as saying that I officially hate Tim Tebow. Not because of his faith, but because he wins games he has no goddamn business winning. TWO FUCKING COMPLETIONS? EIGHT GODDAMN PASS ATTEMPTS? I'm a huge proponent of the running game, but John Fox, that's a fucking joke. 55 RUSHING ATTEMPTS? REALLY? What is this Pop Warner league? Kansas City, how badly do you have to suck monkey cock to LET THEM SUCCEED WITH IT? After what 2, 3 quarters of it, you'd think you could figure out a way to stop it. You know what they are going to do. Denver lost one of their top running backs and you STILL couldn't stop their running game? And your offense? Denver's D is 20th in the league in yards allowed and 30th in points allowed. 30TH. You can't score more than 10 points on them? 3.6 yards per pass? You are WORSE than a Pop Warner team. How did you win 4 straight? How are you not in the Luck sweepstakes? I cannot fathom how goddamn bad this team can be to lose this game AT HOME.

And the Eagles. You really do want to make the NFC East a two-team race, don't you? JOHN SKELTON. That should be all the words required to shame you into quitting football as a team. 3.6 yards per pass against the Cardinals. A QB rating of 32.5. How's that $40 million taste now, bitches? And it was AT HOME. No excuses for losing a lead in the 4th quarter for the 5th time this year. One would have to go to Kansas City to see such a poor performance on a Sunday. They are just lucky the Giants seem willing to keep them in the division race. Also, Washington/Rex Grossman/Miami, LOL.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 14, 2011, 08:19:21 AM
For some reason everyone is still trying to convince us that Mark Sanchez is a good QB. He's not. He's a Matt Ryan that makes more mistakes.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 14, 2011, 09:43:06 AM
Yeah, I still haven't figured out why 1) he was a first-rounder, 2) the sports punditry wants to anoint him an elite QB. His accuracy is terrible when he gets excited and he makes iffy decisions even when not running for his life. He's a system QB - put him in a system where he doesn't have to win you the games by himself, he'll get you 10-12 wins a season with a good team. Have him throwing 40 passes a game? You'll get the Eli-face.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on November 14, 2011, 10:16:29 AM
Yeah, I still haven't figured out why 1) he was a first-rounder, 2) the sports punditry wants to anoint him an elite QB. His accuracy is terrible when he gets excited and he makes iffy decisions even when not running for his life. He's a system QB - put him in a system where he doesn't have to win you the games by himself, he'll get you 10-12 wins a season with a good team. Have him throwing 40 passes a game? You'll get the Eli-face.

He is a good looking So-Cal kid whose looks match the coach's attitude.  He's potentially a marketing goldmine, and the sports media loves marketable people.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 14, 2011, 10:28:33 AM
One would have to go to Kansas City to see such a poor performance on a Sunday.

Ahem... *cough*...

Quote
Pontbriand, a Pro Bowler considered the NFL's best long snapper, accidentally hiked the ball off the right foot of center Alex Mack, who lines up at left guard for field-goal attempts. The ball skipped back to holder Brad Maynard, who did a great job of placing it for Dawson. However, the 13-year veteran's timing was thrown off and Dawson missed the chip shot.

Only the Browns can make fucking up this historically epic.  How does a team block its own field goal? See my previous Browns post a page or two back... that video still holds.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 14, 2011, 11:36:58 AM
The Browns are a factory of sadness.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 14, 2011, 11:38:45 AM
Laces out, Brad.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on November 14, 2011, 12:41:41 PM
And the Eagles. You really do want to make the NFC East a two-team race, don't you? JOHN SKELTON. That should be all the words required to shame you into quitting football as a team. 3.6 yards per pass against the Cardinals. A QB rating of 32.5. How's that $40 million taste now, bitches? And it was AT HOME. No excuses for losing a lead in the 4th quarter for the 5th time this year. One would have to go to Kansas City to see such a poor performance on a Sunday. They are just lucky the Giants seem willing to keep them in the division race. Also, Washington/Rex Grossman/Miami, LOL.

I can understand why the Eagles had problems on offense.  Maclin out, DeSean suspended.  And apparently Vick played that whole game with broken ribs.  Which I guess would have made a difference if those three played on the defense that blew yet another 4th quarter lead.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 14, 2011, 02:56:20 PM
Matt Schaub out for the year (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7235059/source-matt-schaub-houston-texans-season-lisfranc-injury). 

I hope none of you had him in the fantasy league.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on November 14, 2011, 03:02:54 PM
I have Andre Johnson, who would be hurt by this as well, but that doesn't matter much since he's been hurt too.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 14, 2011, 03:13:50 PM
Wow that's huge. They might been the top team in the AFC even with the injuries to Williams and Johnson.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 14, 2011, 03:41:34 PM
My Foster stock just went up.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 14, 2011, 03:45:34 PM
What you don't trust Matt Leinart? :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on November 14, 2011, 03:49:00 PM
Hell, so did Ben Tate's.  Maybe Houston can copy Denver's innovative offense and just run 60 times a game.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on November 14, 2011, 04:04:36 PM
Yeah, I still haven't figured out why 1) he was a first-rounder, 2) the sports punditry wants to anoint him an elite QB. His accuracy is terrible when he gets excited and he makes iffy decisions even when not running for his life. He's a system QB - put him in a system where he doesn't have to win you the games by himself, he'll get you 10-12 wins a season with a good team. Have him throwing 40 passes a game? You'll get the Eli-face.

I'd defend Eli, but Jesus Christ that face is awful.  I expect him to ask for sum french-fried pataters, um-hum, any time they try to interview him.  Peyton and Archie should abduct him and wire his fucking jaw shut.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on November 14, 2011, 04:14:09 PM
Peyton and Archie can't throw stones, they ALL have the Manning face.

(http://manningface.s3.amazonaws.com/images/1169924803_eli_peyton.jpg)

(http://manningface.s3.amazonaws.com/images/1195279737_archie.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on November 14, 2011, 04:21:22 PM
Yah, but they keep their mouths closed at least some of the time.  Eli is staring at the rafters with moon eyes while his mouth gapes open.

Seriously, it looks like they need to give him a sponge wristband so that he doesn't drool on his uniform.  He already has the football helmet for falls!

Edit:

That's not to say that other QBs don't look odd.  I'm pretty sure that Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers were the two rednecks that killed Fonda and Hopper in Easy Rider.

Brees might actually be a fish-man, which would explain why he's blossumed in New Orleans.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on November 14, 2011, 05:05:52 PM
I can never take Roethlisberger seriously because he looks just like Will Ferrell.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on November 14, 2011, 05:24:45 PM
Jon Guden looks like a leprechaun tonight.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 14, 2011, 06:05:58 PM
The Texans are fucking cursed. Peyton Manning gets injured, misses the season and tanks the Colts' chances of winning any games whatsoever and the Texans, who look well on their way to cruising into the AFC Championship game have to rely on Matt Fucking Leinart.

The AFC is Pittsburgh's to lose.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on November 14, 2011, 06:11:06 PM
No one forced them to sign Leinart as the back-up.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 14, 2011, 06:12:24 PM
Randall Cobb is a badass.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on November 14, 2011, 06:16:52 PM
Matt Schaub out for the year (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7235059/source-matt-schaub-houston-texans-season-lisfranc-injury). 

I hope none of you had him in the fantasy league.   :grin:
:angryfist:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 14, 2011, 06:20:08 PM
I can never take Roethlisberger seriously because he looks just like Will Ferrell.
He also has that puffy steroids face.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 14, 2011, 06:29:08 PM
Yah, but they keep their mouths closed at least some of the time.  Eli is staring at the rafters with moon eyes while his mouth gapes open.

Seriously, it looks like they need to give him a sponge wristband so that he doesn't drool on his uniform.  He already has the football helmet for falls!

Edit:

That's not to say that other QBs don't look odd.  I'm pretty sure that Drew Brees and Aaron Rodgers were the two rednecks that killed Fonda and Hopper in Easy Rider.

Brees might actually be a fish-man, which would explain why he's blossumed in New Orleans.

And you can't forget John Elway:



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on November 14, 2011, 07:18:23 PM
Titans might actually win the AFC South now and then graciously exit the playoffs in the first round.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on November 14, 2011, 07:28:16 PM
(http://img.listal.com/image/86911/500full.jpg)


Eli-face.

For Haemish!

(http://i36.tinypic.com/2lllqqc.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on November 14, 2011, 07:37:24 PM
One would have to go to Kansas City to see such a poor performance on a Sunday.

Ahem... *cough*...

Quote
Pontbriand, a Pro Bowler considered the NFL's best long snapper, accidentally hiked the ball off the right foot of center Alex Mack, who lines up at left guard for field-goal attempts. The ball skipped back to holder Brad Maynard, who did a great job of placing it for Dawson. However, the 13-year veteran's timing was thrown off and Dawson missed the chip shot.

Only the Browns can make fucking up this historically epic.  How does a team block its own field goal? See my previous Browns post a page or two back... that video still holds.

Got a new one for you..
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/07/tony-rizzo-rant-cleveland_n_1080267.html

 :awesome_for_real:

I stopped rooting for the Browns years ago, much like I stopped caring to hear about the Bengals.  Fuck it, I'll root for teams that know how to win and whose owners are willing to do what it takes to do so.  Go Pats. Go Steelers.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on November 14, 2011, 08:23:16 PM
Top left is one of my favorite Manning faces.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 14, 2011, 08:30:08 PM
Once again, holy shit the Viking have fallen a long way since firing the mustache.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on November 14, 2011, 09:37:56 PM
Watched New Orleans and Atlanta play a good game, one that was totally blown by two WTF's? One, how does the Atlanta kicker miss that last kick? There were some real bad missed kicks all over the place yesterday, like the Nick Folk kick in the Jets/Pats game (that made no difference). Then, Mike Smith WTF? 4th and 1 on your own goddamn 29 yard line and you go for it? FOR FUCK'S SAKE, WHY? You gain nothing by getting that 4th down. You still have to go another 40 yards after that to get in field goal range. Your defense has actually done a good job most of the game. Darren Sproles got shut out most of the day (my fantasy teams curse you for that). I realize it's the Saints and you want to keep the ball out of his hands, but that's fucking nuts. High risk, little reward and you lost the game and maybe the division because of it.

A couple of points to make.  First, running on fourth and inches is a play with a very high chance of success, especially with a solid run attack like the Falcons have.

The risk wasn't that large because the downside wasn't "lose the game" it was the difference in the chance to lose the game between the Saints having that field position versus one after the punt.  Either way, not picking up the first down was likely to result in a loss.  The reward for making the first down is that you're now quite likely to win the game (think of how important wining the coin flip is in OT, this is the same sort of thing).

Advanced NFL Stats finished up an article about this (http://www.advancednflstats.com/2011/11/how-to-talk-to-skeptic-about-risky-4th.html?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter) with the following:

Quote
If you gave the Saints coaches the choice between receiving the punt and letting the Falcons roll the dice on 4th and inches, they’d take the punt every time and twice on Sunday.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 14, 2011, 09:39:43 PM
There are very, very few situations where you shouldn't go for it on 4th and inches, really. I think it was a good gamble personally.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 14, 2011, 11:05:38 PM
The extra 1 in the loss column disagrees with you.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: BoatApe on November 14, 2011, 11:47:51 PM

 (think of how important wining the coin flip is in OT, this is the same sort of thing).

Counting the OT toss in Sunday's game the Saints are 0-11 on coin tosses this season...


edit: I fail at quoting...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 15, 2011, 12:59:55 AM
The extra 1 in the loss column disagrees with you.  :why_so_serious:

Meh, if they get it 9 times out of 10, which they probably do...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on November 15, 2011, 12:53:45 PM
Failure means you lose the game though, the end. Weighing the 4th and inches in a vacuum is stupid.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 15, 2011, 01:32:35 PM
I would have gone for it if Tim Tebow was my QB. That dude can do it all.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: murdoc on November 15, 2011, 02:06:18 PM
I would have gone for it if Tim Tebow was my QB. That dude can do it all.

[obvious joke]Except pass.[/is obvious]


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on November 15, 2011, 02:45:06 PM
Failure means you lose the game though, the end. Weighing the 4th and inches in a vacuum is stupid.

Punting in this case also pretty much means you lose the game, though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 15, 2011, 02:59:10 PM
Failure means you lose the game though, the end. Weighing the 4th and inches in a vacuum is stupid.

Punting in this case also pretty much means you lose the game, though.
No, it doesn't. On the Saints previous drive in OT they gained 9 yards and went 3 and out, and on their last drive in regulation they went 7 yards in 6 plays and also punted.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 15, 2011, 03:02:37 PM
Failure means you lose the game though, the end. Weighing the 4th and inches in a vacuum is stupid.

Punting also has a high chance of you losing as well, though - any possession change in OT is very very dangerous. There are a lot of factors. In the long term you should almost always go for it on 4th and inches, perhaps you make an exception for scenarios like the playoffs, where if you lose you're out.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on November 15, 2011, 06:19:07 PM
As Trippy said already the saints were entirely stoppable and a punt from there would have pinned them way back. Getting the 4th and inches there doesn't mean you win, not getting it means you lose. Punting it means you don't lose either and have another chance to win.

Then to put even more context onto it, this is the 4th and inches he was planning to punt on, then called a TimeOut to let the Saints Defense get the clear message "we are totally going for it so bring your goal-line D and stuff us". Which they did.  :oh_i_see:



This isn't baseball with 10,000 games to average everything out for you. You play with the situation you are in with all the context around it.

The sample size for a football season is too small.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 15, 2011, 06:40:26 PM
All I hear is "blah blah blah I don't understand probability!"


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on November 15, 2011, 06:42:31 PM
Well you swayed me with that  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 15, 2011, 08:47:16 PM
That Saints had been stoppable. This isn't the Super Bowl Saints that just rolled the fuck over people. The odds are NOT on the 4th and inches play, they are on punting and the defense. Failing the 4th and inches means you definitely lose. Punting means you might lose if a bunch of different things happen, all or none of which may happen.

It was a bonehead play call.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on November 16, 2011, 12:52:31 PM
I would have gone for it if Tim Tebow was my QB. That dude can do it all.

[obvious joke]Except pass.[/is obvious]

Hey, half of his throws were for TD(s) on Sunday. :>

The Broncos Week 2 win over Cin is looking more and more important.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 16, 2011, 01:21:49 PM
Is anyone else amused that Timmy T and the Sanchize are going to be facing off tomorrow?

Battle of the 2 most overrated QBs in the game!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on November 16, 2011, 01:30:37 PM
I don't know if either of those could be overrated. Most seem dubious about either.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 16, 2011, 01:34:00 PM
Timmy has God.  Who does Sanchez have? 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 16, 2011, 01:44:18 PM
Timmy has God.  Who does Sanchez have? 

Clock management.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 16, 2011, 03:55:59 PM
Timmy has God.  Who does Sanchez have? 

The ladies. At least the non nutty-religious ones.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on November 17, 2011, 07:47:58 AM
That Saints had been stoppable. This isn't the Super Bowl Saints that just rolled the fuck over people. The odds are NOT on the 4th and inches play, they are on punting and the defense. Failing the 4th and inches means you definitely lose. Punting means you might lose if a bunch of different things happen, all or none of which may happen.

It was a bonehead play call.

The play was a bad one, but I don't think going for it was. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on November 17, 2011, 08:00:18 AM
If your team can't get you inches when it counts, you don't deserve to win. It's that simple. I'll never hate on a 4th and inches "GO FOR IT" call. You punt there and you are sending a clear message...my offense is shit. Bad coaching is taking a time out before-hand. You should have a goto play or two for the occasion.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 17, 2011, 08:32:43 AM
If your team can't get you inches when it counts, you don't deserve to win. It's that simple. I'll never hate on a 4th and inches "GO FOR IT" call. You punt there and you are sending a clear message...my offense is shit. Bad coaching is taking a time out before-hand. You should have a goto play or two for the occasion.

That's dumb. In college, yeah. In the NFL, there's no such thing as an easy 4th down and inches play. It could be that your team is playing lights out defense and you'd rather suffocate the other team. It could be that you trust your guys to get the stop. Would the Jets or Baltimore not punt in that situation?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 17, 2011, 08:39:11 AM
It was a risky call and they paid the penalty for it.  I don't see the big deal.  There's no guarantee that punting would have worked either.  The biggest issue here is the lame ass way that the NFL deals with OT.  I like the college way much better.  Sudden death is just idiocy.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 17, 2011, 08:53:45 AM
What's idoicy is that the NFL knows it's stupid, has changed the playoff OT to reflect that, but still refuses to make those rules apply to the regular season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 17, 2011, 08:59:04 AM
The actual math:

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2011/11/falcons-4th-down-in-ot.html

TLDR: Going for it was the right call.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on November 17, 2011, 09:12:04 AM
Is Tebow a legitimate (triple) option? (http://www.coldhardfootballfacts.com/Articles/11_4680_Is_Tebow_a_legitimate_%28triple%29_option%3F.html)

Quote
Tebow appears to be precisely what Schmidt envisioned in 1971.  He is a big, tough runner who does not turn the ball over, can use the option's leverage to exploit overly aggressive pass-rushing defenses, and can withstand the physical pounding that accompanies the life of any person brave enough to regularly run the ball in the NFL.

These facts have caught many, such as Slate’s Brown, off guard.

“While many wondered whether Tebow might be the guy to bring the spread option to the NFL,” Brown wrote, “few thought it would be because his team was terrible, his coaches were too scared to let him pass, and the organization didn’t believe in him enough to care whether he got beat up doing it.”

Actually, if you think about it a little, these are the only conditions under which any organization in any sport would grudgingly grant a chance to succeed to an unconventional approach like Tebow’s approach.  Innovation--including Yeoman's veer option, Royal's and Bellard's wishbone option, and Walsh's West Coast Offense--only gets a chance when everything else fails and an organization has absolutely nothing to lose by saying, "What the heck, go ahead and give your crazy idea a try."

If Bill Walsh were still alive, he undoubtedly would agree with the QuantCoach, as Walsh himself turned to the wishbone triple option on one dire occasion.

On October 5, 1987, in a game that until now there was little reason to recall, San Francisco met New York in the first Monday Night Football Game to feature expendable “replacement players” who were substituting for striking NFL players.

Though the NFL regulars were on strike, there was no certainty that one of the NFL’s biggest stars, Giants’ linebacker Lawrence Taylor, would honor the strike.  Walsh knew that it was hard enough to block Taylor with bona fide NFL blockers, and he had to have known that it would be impossible to block Taylor with replacement blockers.

According to Walsh’s own memoir, San Francisco prepared fully for the replacement games and “had a contingency for every logical scenario.”  Thus, it is reasonable to speculate that Walsh calculated that if Taylor crossed the picket line and played in the game, then the only player on the field who would have been capable of blocking Lawrence Taylor would have been … Lawrence Taylor.

Because Walsh would have had no reasonable hope of blocking Taylor with a physical blocker, his only chance to block Taylor would have been with an abstract idea.  The wishbone triple option would have been the perfect resource for meeting Walsh’s needs.
 
Though ultimately Taylor did not play against the 49ers, in the second half, Walsh put San Francisco in the wishbone and unleashed Mark Stevens, an obscure quarterback from the University of Utah.  Stevens operated the triple option deftly and ran for a touchdown and passed for another as San Francisco clobbered the Giants, 41-21.

Two weeks after the 49ers’ victory, Mark Stevens’ NFL career came to an end when NFL regulars returned to action.

Tebow’s productive career might not last much longer than Mark Stevens’ career.

But the QuantCoach has seen enough in the last two weeks to predict that, using the leverage derived from his unconventional option, Tebow will deliver the 2011 AFC West title to Denver.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 17, 2011, 09:20:52 AM
The actual math:

http://www.advancednflstats.com/2011/11/falcons-4th-down-in-ot.html

TLDR: Going for it was the right call.

By 5%. So out of 20 scenarios, you'll win 11 and lose in 9. Given the rarity of NFL overtime, I'd rather put the ball in the Saint's hands when the defense had already held them scoreless since about 7 minutes left in the 4th quarter, AND already gotten a stop in overtime. Also, at the time Kasay was 4/7 from 40+ yards and he had already been forced to kick two from that distance in the game. He's perfect inside 40 all season long. So, if you turned it over, you know you lost.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 17, 2011, 09:23:01 AM
8% more likely to win, and that's based on 4th and 1, not 4th and inches. The actual number would be a good bit higher than that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 17, 2011, 09:27:31 AM
8% more likely to win, and that's based on 4th and 1, not 4th and inches. The actual number would be a good bit higher than that.

It's also based on historical stats, not on the fact that the kicker in question is 25th in the league from 40+, and that your D hadn't allowed a NO drive into the red zone since 5m left in the 3rd quarter.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on November 17, 2011, 07:01:35 PM
That cuts both ways.  The Saints have a pretty shoddy run defense by both traditional (27th in yardage, last in yards/attempt) and advanced (19th in DVOA) metrics.

Mitigating that are that the Saints are almost certainly more aggressive in getting into chip shot range than the average team in that situation, reducing the failed conversion's chance of still winning.  On the offensive side, most of the commentary has been around preferring the QB Sneak play and I think the specifics we know about Micheal Turner on top of that play's generally higher success rate back that up.

Still, the specifics about this particular match-up don't go convincingly in one direction enough to change the interpretation of the underlying data.  More importantly, focusing on small-sample size specifics like one particular drive (they stopped them the first time!) is just being silly when everyone in football acknowledges just how important simply being on offense in OT is.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 17, 2011, 07:30:51 PM
To take it a different direction, Mark Sanchez is fucking awful.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on November 17, 2011, 08:50:37 PM
How 'bout them Tebows! :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on November 17, 2011, 10:09:05 PM
The dude is 4 and 1.  I don't really like or dislike the guy, but it sure is an interesting story.  It'll be hilarious if they make the playoffs...and as ridiculous as that sounds, so does Tebow going 4 and 1 in his first 5 starts.  Amazing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on November 18, 2011, 12:34:05 AM
I want him to win every game this season, just for the hilarious aftermath every game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 18, 2011, 04:57:00 AM
Even though he's a jesus weirdo I hope he succeeds for a couple of reasons:  1.  He's completely unconventional for the NFL and 2.  Everyone said he couldn't do it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Threash on November 18, 2011, 05:17:29 AM
I hate the guy for doing a superbowl ad campaign for a hate group but watching an utterly incompetent QB lead a really bad team into a 4-1 record is massively entertaining, as is hearing the "experts" talking about it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on November 18, 2011, 05:32:28 AM
To be fair, only two of their 4 wins were against teams with power rankings in the top 20 in the league (Oakland at 19th and climbing and Jets at 14th and falling).  KC and Miami hardly count as wins unless you're a Division 3 college team. 

I put Tebow in the Vick category.  As soon as teams get enough film on him, he's done.  The guys needs the offseason to work on his mechanics.  Sadly, even with perfect mechanics I don't think he has the football intellect to be successful at this level. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 18, 2011, 05:40:02 AM
To be fair, only two of their 4 wins were against teams with power rankings in the top 20 in the league (Oakland at 19th and climbing and Jets at 14th and falling).  KC and Miami hardly count as wins unless you're a Division 3 college team. 

I put Tebow in the Vick category.  As soon as teams get enough film on him, he's done.  The guys needs the offseason to work on his mechanics.  Sadly, even with perfect mechanics I don't think he has the football intellect to be successful at this level. 

Yeah, but both Oakland and KC were division games... and that division is the AFC's version of the NFC West sans 49ers... wait, West?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 18, 2011, 07:30:47 AM
I managed to catch the last drive of the game last night. GOD... FUCKING... DAMNIT... will no one rid me of this annoying Tebone? I've not really seen how bad of a passer he really is. He LOOKS like a college quarterback. His throws were uniformly TERRIBLE. Watching him take 3 steps and run for his fucking life is infuriating. If I wanted to watch the fucking NCAA, I'd WATCH THE NCAA. And you know what? Fuck you Rex Ryan and the New York Jets. FUCK YOU IN YOUR EARHOLES. You want to strut around and talk all big and bad about how your team should be in the Super Bowl and will be? Fuck you, prove it. You lost to a goddamn Florida Gators team. You couldn't even stop the run when you knew exactly what was coming at you. You couldn't cover a bunch of fucking second string wideouts taking short arm passes from an amateur QB. It's like watching the fucking 1987 strike scrub replacement games.

Not only are the Jets now 5-5, the same record as this bunch of fucking amateurs, you are BEHIND them in the playoffs standings because you couldn't score 18 points. Sanchez did what Sanchez does when faced with having to win the game for them - he lost it. His passes were overthrown and he couldn't manage the clock. If you fuckheads manage to bumble your way into the playoffs, I hope you lose to the goddamn Bengals. Or better yet, lose to this team, since the entire league seems willing to hand them a playoff berth on a road paved with stunning ineptitude.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2011, 07:49:13 AM
I hate Tebow as a Gator. I like how the rest of the league is finally understanding how pissed off UGA fans were after all our years hearing about this dipshit. The year we crushed him and stomped on the end zone is a highlight game of my college watching career.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 18, 2011, 08:10:13 AM
A little part of me wants the magic to last all the way to the Super Bowl for both the Broncos and 49ers. Stomping Tebow would be almost (ALMOST) as satisfying as stomping Elway was.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2011, 08:21:37 AM
SF is an odd duck. They play so few real games I can't get a read on them yet for postseason success. I know they lost to the Cowboys, but they also beat the Giants. The rest of their games have been against teams I don't consider to be playoff bound with the exception of perhaps Cincy.

They have games against Baltimore and Pitt. I will watch those closely.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 18, 2011, 08:21:56 AM
You couldn't even stop the run when you knew exactly what was coming at you.

This is the only part that I can not seem to get my head around. You are playing the Denveer Broncos, guess what they will be doing? Running the ball. I dunno, when you find yourself against a weak passing QB and a strong running game, you'd think a coach would just stack the box and make the QB beat you with his arm. The kicker is, you also have arguably the best cover CB in the game and a decent one on the other side, so wtf?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on November 18, 2011, 08:43:14 AM
A couple things about the Broncos, from a fan.

I dislike Tebow greatly as a person.

I've had to put up with a lot of crazies spewing conspiracy theories about why Tebow wasn't starting. But now he's starting, and the team is 4-1 under his arm and the gameplan designed exactly around him. He has a mediocre receivers corps, a decent OL, a good RB and what has become a really good defense.

So, while a good chunk of the team is mediocre or, as some say terrible, there are some great parts of this team that make me hopeful that if Tebow can adjust his throwing motion/release to a consistent method, this team has the building blocks for a much stronger team. That or we draft/trade for another WB who.. you know, PLAYS QB.

For whatever reason.... it's working. For now. But it's causing me to have mild heart attacks each game.

(also, screw you ing. I'LL SEE YOU IN HELL. HORSE FACED HELL.)

(also, the Bengals are a decent team.)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 18, 2011, 08:46:35 AM
Yeah, there is NO EXCUSE for the Jets to let this fucker score 17 points, ESPECIALLY on that last drive. Play man-to-man with your "best cover corner in football" on their best receiver, zone coverage for the rest, have 2 spy linebackers for the backfield. I don't understand how they can just NOT stop the run or those shit passes he was throwing. Maybe it was that the passes were so bad and inaccurate that the corners couldn't grasp it, like 64th century robots fighting cavemen with clubs or some shit.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 18, 2011, 09:15:22 AM
Tebow really only scored 7 points but given how poorly the Jets played on offense and how well the Broncos played on defense that's all they needed from him. 7 came on Sanchez's pick 6 + 1 and the other 3 were from the Jets 19 yard punt. On Tebow's TD run the Jets for some reason blitzed from the inside instead of from the outsides and all the receivers were deep so there was nobody around to stop him once he managed to get around the corner.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 18, 2011, 09:47:54 AM
Yeah, there was no excuse for leaving him room to scramble outside and walk in. Just a terrible call or terrible execution (or both).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2011, 10:02:49 AM
I dislike Tebow greatly as a person.

I understand hating his religion or his political shit. Hating him personally? That's the one thing I've never faulted him on. He seems like a genuinely nice guy.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 18, 2011, 10:17:38 AM
I dislike Tebow greatly as a person.

I understand hating his religion or his political shit. Hating him personally? That's the one thing I've never faulted him on. He seems like a genuinely nice guy.

Proselytizing at every opportunity is part of his personality. Plenty of religious and conservative people who don't feel the need to burden the entire world with the beliefs at every step. Plenty of agnostic/atheist and liberal people too, for that matter.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2011, 10:20:55 AM
Given the message, I like it. It doesn't hurt to have a guy walking the walk in the NFL. It also doesn't hurt that when he thanks God for his success, he actually means it instead of just a random cliche.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on November 18, 2011, 10:25:03 AM
I specifically steer clear of saying "hate". I dislike him for his stances on social issues, and a general annoyance with thanking your team second behind a magic man in the sky.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 18, 2011, 10:28:35 AM
I think it is unbelievably arrogant to think that God gives a shit about you and how you play in a game. Or maybe he just likes you better than the other team, even if there are some true believers there too? STFU and play.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2011, 10:47:56 AM
I think it is unbelievably arrogant to think that God gives a shit about you and how you play in a game. Or maybe he just likes you better than the other team, even if there are some true believers there too? STFU and play.

I don't believe he thinks God propels him to victory. I think he thanks God for given him the chance to play in the NFL, and the opportunities to use his natural talents.

Plus he does thank his guys. In fact the first quote from him after the game was: "I think it was just a bunch of guys that kept fighting and that had been knocked down a bunch of times but continued to get back up. I’m just so proud of those guys for their resiliency, their patience and their determination.”

He's a nice dude, he's just religious.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on November 18, 2011, 10:53:52 AM
He's a Focus on the Family stooge. He is far from "just" religious.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on November 18, 2011, 11:03:55 AM
...and the NFL thread gets moved to Politics.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2011, 11:11:11 AM
He's a Focus on the Family stooge. He is far from "just" religious.

He's politically active as well, I'd agree. It wouldn't shock me if he ran for office after his career and win in a landslide. But that's not the point, the point is he's a well below-average QB with an exceptional personality, and a controversial evangelical philosophy.

Besides, I've never had problems with Christians ruffling people's feathers. I do it a lot.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on November 18, 2011, 11:17:10 AM
And some of us dislike him for that zealotry and political stance.

 I understand that other people may love his precious little ass for the same reasons that I dislike him, but that does not change my stance towards him in that respect.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 18, 2011, 11:34:27 AM
Sure I get that. Disliking him for that reason makes total sense.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Margalis on November 18, 2011, 08:41:13 PM
The Jets lost that game more than the Broncos won it.

The Jets missed an easy FG, threw a pick 6, fumbled a kick return, shanked a punt, were playing with their third-string RB and did nothing on offense. None of that can be attributed to Tebow. If you look at the Broncos wins the story is similar everywhere. The Raiders were playing without their stud RB and with a quarterback playing his second (?) game for the Raiders after a year on the shelf.

Right now the Broncos are beating bad teams, many of which are beating themselves as much as anything else. I don't see any Tebow magic here, just a bad team beating worse teams.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on November 18, 2011, 10:43:15 PM
The Jets lost that game more than the Broncos won it.

The Jets missed an easy FG, threw a pick 6, fumbled a kick return, shanked a punt, were playing with their third-string RB and did nothing on offense. None of that can be attributed to Tebow. If you look at the Broncos wins the story is similar everywhere. The Raiders were playing without their stud RB and with a quarterback playing his second (?) game for the Raiders after a year on the shelf.

Right now the Broncos are beating bad teams, many of which are beating themselves as much as anything else. I don't see any Tebow magic here, just a bad team beating worse teams.

So God is a Tebow fan!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: DLRiley on November 18, 2011, 11:19:58 PM
I can't stop laughing at the hatred spewed because he wears his religion on his sleeve, instead of keeping it in the closet don't ask don't tell style. I gotta find me a gay quaterback who can't throw worth shit to dog pile. You guys should get over it and just say "he is an out in the open christian so i haaaaaaaaaaaate him" and stop pretending it has something to do with his inability to throw a ball in a straight line.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on November 19, 2011, 01:47:40 AM
Players having prayer circles and thanking a higher power at the start of their fluffy post-game interviews didn't start with Tim Tebow and are things I really don't care much about.

As a person, Tebow seems like enough guy.  As a public figure, Tebow is someone who I disagree with strongly on some issues.  (The fact that I even have a "as a public figure..." clause here is what separates him from the vast majority of athletes, especially in the mostly anonymous NFL.  Nothing else.)

As a contemporary NFL QB, Tebow makes no sense at all but I like seeing where a disruptive force ends up at whenever possible, as long as it's not my team setting themselves up for likely failure.  As a broader sports/cultural figure, Tebow and the narratives around him are just about everything that makes me dislike discussing sports outside of analytical circles.

It would be unreasonable to fault him as a human being for the latter two points and while the former two are of his own doing, I can't be bothered with strongly disliking some random athlete that doesn't even play for a team I follow.

Still, I'm not going to bring up the Chargers being disastrously unlucky or worse :heartbreak:, so we may as well keep talking about this guy!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Threash on November 19, 2011, 07:23:36 AM
I can't stop laughing at the hatred spewed because he wears his religion on his sleeve, instead of keeping it in the closet don't ask don't tell style. I gotta find me a gay quaterback who can't throw worth shit to dog pile. You guys should get over it and just say "he is an out in the open christian so i haaaaaaaaaaaate him" and stop pretending it has something to do with his inability to throw a ball in a straight line.

Is "superbowl ad campaign for a hate group" really that hard to understand?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 19, 2011, 07:58:45 AM
Okay, let's knock it off or start a Tebow thread in Politics.  This shit is getting old.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 19, 2011, 09:27:10 AM
I have to agree. I don't give two shits about Tebow's religion other than the stuff he puts out there that the sports media creams itself over, as if no other athlete has been religious ever. I hate Tebow because of the hype that surrounds him that is completely undeserved. It's the same reason I hate Tony Romo - the sports media builds him up so they can shit all over him when he fails, just like they've done with Romo.

Let's talk about goddamn football.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 19, 2011, 02:18:50 PM
Romo sucks.

Back to you Haemish!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on November 20, 2011, 07:20:54 AM
I immensely dislike Romo for his political stance of having sex with attractive blond women.  That, and the fact that he is a Cowboy.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on November 20, 2011, 08:04:53 AM
I looked at the football on TV today, and went "eww".  It's all games that one team should win, so the only value is if one of the designated chumps somehow makes a game of it.  

The only games that I think I might check out are Bills/Miami and Giants/Eagles, and those are two more of that type of game.  I guess GB, like any great offense, is always interesting to watch.

After last week, where there were a pile of good match-ups and relevant games, this week is just a giant let down.

Edit:

Maybe SD/Chicago could be a decent game.  The Chargers have just been so off and on, and Chicago has looked great, so I'm expecting a stomping.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2011, 08:42:59 AM
Tampa Bay v. Green Bay bothers me the most. This is the national game of the week? REALLY?

FUCK YOU FOX!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on November 20, 2011, 08:53:32 AM
Tampa Bay v. Green Bay bothers me the most. This is the national game of the week? REALLY?

FUCK YOU FOX!

Yah.

As I said, the only redeeming factor is that the Packers offense is always amazing to watch, much like Brady or Peyton when they're on.  Being in the Northeast, I don't get that many Packers games.


I mean, what about Bills/Dolphins?  If the Bills win, so what... they trashed a terrible Dolphins team.  If the Dolphins win, it shits on the Bills season and the Dolphins are still a terrible team. 

Same for the Giants/Eagles, though obviously Paelos will be sacrificing virgins to Abacus, God of Accountants, that the Eagles beat the Giants and let the Cowboys catch up in the standings.  The Eagles are done, and the only draw in watching that game is to see if the Giants step on their dicks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on November 20, 2011, 09:15:08 AM
Ok, woo!  Week 11!  WOOO....woo.

Lets see, Giants over the Eagles.  Hey Philly fans enjoy the Vince Young Mello Yello Meltdown Hello Kitty Hissyfits!

Ravens over Bengals: Ravens tough at home and AJ is out.  Gotta love the Bengals rebuilding though.

da Bears over da Dolts.  I mean, it's the Dolts.

Lions over the Panthers in the Gritty Kitty Bowl.  I hope.

Dallas beats the Skins annnnd Dallas has a moist, tender schedule.  They make the playoffs where Romo does what Romo does best.

Titans over Falcs.  I think the Titans see their opportunity with two opposing division QB's out.  Falcons are still suffering PTSD from the 4th down call last week.

I say Miami over Buffalo just because the direction both teams are going.

Who cares about the other games.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2011, 12:13:22 PM
Miami is showing that they were, in reality, actually trying to lose earlier in the season. They are CRUSHING the Bills.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on November 20, 2011, 04:20:03 PM
Tampa Bay v. Green Bay bothers me the most. This is the national game of the week? REALLY?

FUCK YOU FOX!

Hell of a lot closer than you thought it would be, eh?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2011, 04:31:25 PM
Yes, it was closer, but it was never "close" if that makes sense.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 20, 2011, 04:32:45 PM
Wow.  Buffalo has completely shit the bed.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on November 20, 2011, 04:37:15 PM
Yes, it was closer, but it was never "close" if that makes sense.

It would make sense if say the score was 35-10 in the 4th quarter and the Bucs got two late touchdown to make the score look more respectable.  28-26 with 3 minutes left to play in the 4th seems more like 'the Pack survived a scare against a team they should have had no trouble with' to me.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2011, 04:41:51 PM
I watched it. It never felt like Green Bay was struggling. It felt like their defense sucks.

That being said, Tampa couldn't stop Green Bay anyway.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on November 20, 2011, 04:50:59 PM
So... the Bears and Lions have a joint 3rd best record in the NFC with the Saints, behind the packers and the 49ers. Not that it is likely to stay that way, but is it possible to have two wild-card teams from the same division?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on November 20, 2011, 04:53:55 PM
So... the Bears and Lions have a joint 3rd best record in the NFC with the Saints, behind the packers and the 49ers. Not that it is likely to stay that way, but is it possible to have two wild-card teams from the same division?

Yes.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2011, 06:48:35 PM
It's happened in the NFC East a couple times I think.

Not this year though, not by a long shot.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on November 20, 2011, 07:01:45 PM
Jake Cutler's thumb may be broken so that might sink the Bears.  However, the Lions have a tough remaining schedule so who knows. 



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on November 20, 2011, 07:09:26 PM
I think the Bears should be more worried about his brother, Jay.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2011, 08:22:47 PM
Same for the Giants/Eagles, though obviously Paelos will be sacrificing virgins to Abacus, God of Accountants, that the Eagles beat the Giants and let the Cowboys catch up in the standings.  The Eagles are done, and the only draw in watching that game is to see if the Giants step on their dicks.

Thanks Abacus!  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on November 20, 2011, 08:26:56 PM
 :uhrr:

(http://a.espncdn.com/photo/2008/0125/nfl_g_manning_580.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 20, 2011, 08:34:05 PM
Hey the good news for the Giants is that the division will all be decided by head to head matchups most likely.

Considering that the Cowboys are tied now, though, I think that's good news for for both teams!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on November 20, 2011, 08:44:12 PM
It just kills me that no matter how shitty the Eagles are, the Giants find new and exciting ways to lose to them (or win REALLY UGLY) when they shouldn't.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on November 21, 2011, 06:16:19 AM
Same for the Giants/Eagles, though obviously Paelos will be sacrificing virgins to Abacus, God of Accountants, that the Eagles beat the Giants and let the Cowboys catch up in the standings.  The Eagles are done, and the only draw in watching that game is to see if the Giants step on their dicks.

Thanks Abacus!  :grin:

My god plutonium could not save me.   :cry:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on November 21, 2011, 06:38:59 AM
The giants really need to win both thier games v. the Cowboys, but the boys have a way easier remaining schedule, I think they can get away with a split with the giants and still win the division.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on November 21, 2011, 06:44:50 AM

Lets see, Giants over the Eagles.  Hey Philly fans enjoy the Vince Young Mello Yello Meltdown Hello Kitty Hissyfits!



tee hee hee hee

9-7 can win this division and the Eagles can get there.  I don't think 10-6 is remotely possible from 4-6 today.  I won't even hope for that.

Week 12: New England - it would take a miracle
Week 13: @ Seattle - certainly winnable
Week 14: @ Miami - this week was a fluke
Week 15: New Jersey Jets - home field makes this a 70/30 chance to win
Week 16: @ Dallas
Week 17: Washington

Winning the last two weeks would mean any tie with Dallas on win/loss would favor the Eagles.

Now compare that to the Giants schedule.

@ Saints, lose 6-5
Green Bay, lose 6-6
@ Dallas, lose 6-7
Washington, win 7-7
Jets, win 8-7
Dallas, lose 8-8

And lastly Dallas, who looks like a real contender due to schedule

Miami, win 7-4
@ Arizona, lose 7-5
Giants, win 8-5
@ Tampa, win 9-5
Eagles, lose 9-6
@ Giants, lose 9-7

Sorry for all that.  I wanted to lay it out for myself anyway.  That is the dream, 5% scenario!



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 21, 2011, 06:48:03 AM
One of the few times I enjoy watching the Eagles win. Especially when you get a Vince Young post-game interview!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on November 21, 2011, 11:00:38 AM

Lets see, Giants over the Eagles.  Hey Philly fans enjoy the Vince Young Mello Yello Meltdown Hello Kitty Hissyfits!



tee hee hee hee

9-7 can win this division and the Eagles can get there.  I don't think 10-6 is remotely possible from 4-6 today.  I won't even hope for that.

Week 12: New England - it would take a miracle
Week 13: @ Seattle - certainly winnable
Week 14: @ Miami - this week was a fluke
Week 15: New Jersey Jets - home field makes this a 70/30 chance to win
Week 16: @ Dallas
Week 17: Washington

Winning the last two weeks would mean any tie with Dallas on win/loss would favor the Eagles.

Now compare that to the Giants schedule.

@ Saints, lose 6-5
Green Bay, lose 6-6
@ Dallas, lose 6-7
Washington, win 7-7
Jets, win 8-7
Dallas, lose 8-8

And lastly Dallas, who looks like a real contender due to schedule

Miami, win 7-4
@ Arizona, lose 7-5
Giants, win 8-5
@ Tampa, win 9-5
Eagles, lose 9-6
@ Giants, lose 9-7

Sorry for all that.  I wanted to lay it out for myself anyway.  That is the dream, 5% scenario!

I'd say it's currently 0% since you have the Giants and the Cowboys losing to each other simultaneously in the final week.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 21, 2011, 11:51:20 AM
I didn't get to watch much more than the Packers game and the end of the Giants/Eagles debacle, but here's my weekly recap.

Buffalo Bills... goddamnit. What the fuck is with teams making Miami look competent? Is Matt Moore really that much better of a QB than Chad Henne? (Answer? Likely yes.) What the fuck happened to the Bills? Losing Fred Jackson must have hurt but they haven't looked remotely like a good team for 4 weeks. New England is busily trying to make that a 1 or 2 team division and the Jets are helping them.

That Packers game was a good one, but yeah, I had no real worries that they would pull it out. Their defense gives up way too many points, which is a worry for the playoffs. Turnovers against mediocre/bad teams are something you can rely on. Against a San Fran or New Orleans? Maybe not, although I think they match up well against New Orleans. San Fran is really the team to sweat in the NFC because they can control the ball, aren't making many mistakes or turnovers and their defense is solid. I could easily see this being the NFC Championship matchup.

LOLGIANTSELIFACE! Seriously, why can't the Giants be consistent? You cannot lose against Vince Fucking Young and expect to be considered a good team. It's just not done. No one wants to win this division. We can be reasonably assured the Redskins won't win it, and the Eagles probably won't either, but now the Cowboys are tied for first. They could actually win the division because of a soft schedule and the fact that the Giants seem incapable of being the same team week in and week out.

There's really only 5 teams in the wild card mix in the NFC - Cowboys, Detroit, Chicago, Atlanta and the Giants in that order of tie breakers. Either the Giants or the Cowboys will be the division winner, and the other will be sitting at home. Chicago just lost Cutler for the rest of the regular season so you can expect a steady diet of Matt Forte and not much else. Good thing their last 6 games are against Oakland, KC and Denver, Seattle, Green Bay and Minnesota - all but 1 of those you'd consider winnable and the other is a toss up because they play the Packers well. Detroit gets screwed in their scheduling as they get Green Bay twice AND New Orleans, and they are doing it without a running game until Best gets back. Atlanta could very well knock one of those guys out of the wild card as their schedule is almost as easy as the Bears and their QB is still around.

Fuck the Chargers, they are done. I think they have handed the division over to the Raiders, who aren't good enough to go far in the playoffs but are better than Denver, San Diego and KC. I can't believe Tim Tebow is going to be in a meaningful game in December. The rest of the AFC playoff pictures is a mess. Baltimore is currently the #1 seed thanks to beating Pittsburgh and Cincy, but shit, they aren't consistent enough. Thankfully, no one else in the AFC is either. The Titans are trying hard to lose any chance at the South. If New England shits the bed tonight, that would make 5 teams at 5-5, one game out of the wild card spots. It's now obvious after back to back losses to the Steelers and the Ravens that the Bengals aren't as bad as I thought, but they aren't more than a wild card team at best... this year. Provided Mike Brown doesn't fuck them (HAH), they could be good next year with a good draft. And goddamn DENVER has the tie breaks over all the other 5-5 teams because of their shittastic division.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on November 21, 2011, 11:54:50 AM


I'd say it's currently 0% since you have the Giants and the Cowboys losing to each other simultaneously in the final week.

Hurggh.  I thought I checked for just such a mistake.  Still, that would make the Giants 9-7 and the Eagles would win under my scenario for having a better division record.  I think, anyway.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 21, 2011, 12:05:00 PM
I'd say it's currently 0% since you have the Giants and the Cowboys losing to each other simultaneously in the final week.

The way they're playing this year I think that's entirely likely.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 21, 2011, 12:14:13 PM
Atlanta's schedule is sneaky because they are terrible on the road.

Atlanta's 6-4 and basically has to go 10-6 minimum because they lost to Chicago.

Two games are against MIN and JAX at home, that brings them to 8-4. Two games are against playoff teams on the road that they certainly lose NO and HOU, and that brings them to 8-6.

To me, it comes down to if they can beat TB at home and Carolina on the road. I'm not sure on either.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 21, 2011, 12:15:57 PM
Surely to fucking god they can win those two games. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: murdoc on November 21, 2011, 12:17:13 PM
Man, the Bucs hung around just enough for me to have a sliver of hope. For a guy that really became a huge Buc fan based on the defense they fielded during the late 1990s/early 2000s, being 31st in the league is tough to swallow.

That 54yd run by Blount was a beauty.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 21, 2011, 12:21:30 PM
Yeah, current Tampa is nothing like Tampa of old.  Or I guess I should say that they are more like Tampa of old. 

(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-0olfN-QItGY/Ta5SHd8EPsI/AAAAAAAAABM/LhpaRzA2nGQ/s320/9.+Old+school+tampa+bay.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on November 21, 2011, 12:31:19 PM
At least that Tampa of old had Lee Roy Selmon.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 21, 2011, 12:33:13 PM
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/03/Lee_Roy_Selmon.jpg)

Motherfucker, I will kill you. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 21, 2011, 01:27:07 PM
Surely to fucking god they can win those two games. 

They lost to Tampa already. They barely made it out of Seattle alive. They can lose to any team on the road.

Tampa in the Dome? They SHOULD win. However, last year they only won by 6. They year before that they only won by a FG. Year before that, win by a FG. The game is just ridiculously close even though it has no business being close. So yeah, Atlanta has won those close matches, but at some point if they keep letting teams hang around they are going to pay for it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 21, 2011, 01:35:07 PM
Well, if they can't beat Carolina on the road they don't belong in the playoffs.  It seems as if Ryan is having a disappointing year, but I haven't been paying that much attention.  What seems to be the issue?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 21, 2011, 01:39:57 PM
Well, if they can't beat Carolina on the road they don't belong in the playoffs.  It seems as if Ryan is having a disappointing year, but I haven't been paying that much attention.  What seems to be the issue?

The offensive line has been terrible. They are 10th in giving up the most QB hits. As a result, Ryan is low on time, and can't really get set for the deep threat. That's sort of a problem when you drafted Julio Jones to be your explosive guy, and he's neutralized. And in the fact that Turner is much more effective in grinding yards on the ground, and you get more of a move away from the passing game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 21, 2011, 01:40:44 PM
The Falcons offense isn't sure who it wants to be. They got Julio Jones to have a deep threat, so they started passing more in the early games and it didn't work. They can't decide whether to be a run first or pass to run team. And their defense is all kinds of WTFBBQ terrible. They've gotten better in recent weeks, but still bad.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 22, 2011, 05:46:43 AM
I guess the Pats are back to being badass.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 22, 2011, 06:30:22 AM
I guess the Pats are back to being badass.


I would not get too ahead on them... this was KC after all.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bungee on November 22, 2011, 06:34:30 AM
I guess the Pats are back to being badass.


I would not get too ahead on them... this was KC after all.

Look at their previous schedule and compare it to what they have left now. They'll sit fine and dandy at top of their division with the press all over them and their "finally on track" D with no one mentioning how hard they failed facing serious competition.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 22, 2011, 08:03:49 AM
Yeah, it was Kansas City. I'd say the toughest teams the Pats have faced have been Pittsburgh, the Raiders, Giants, Cowboys and the Jets and all but the Steelers on that list are really inconsistent teams. They'll make the playoffs easily with their remaining schedule. Their toughest games are against Philly and Denver, both teams that can be world-beaters or complete chumps depending on the week. The only other game that looks even moderately tough is the Redskins game and only because it's in Washington. I expect they'll finish 11-5 and be a game or two ahead of the Jets for the division title.

Looking at the AFC playoff contenders remaining schedules, I see Denver going 4-2 (that's really sad - their schedule is marshmallow over a fire soft) for a 9-7 season. Cincy goes 3-3 to also go 9-7. Tennessee goes 4-2 for a 9-7 and the Jets CAN go 5-1 to end up 10-6 (or they could go 3-3 and be out of it completely). That last wild card spot is going down to the last day.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 22, 2011, 08:06:11 AM
Looks like Dallas has an easy road to the playoffs.  They could easily finish 11-5. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 22, 2011, 08:10:35 AM
Yeah, there's a good chance they could win the division and the Giants miss the playoffs completely just based on how different their schedules are. Of course, I think either one gets knocked out of the playoffs by the second round anyway.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 22, 2011, 08:11:50 AM
I don't know.  The Cowboys have the talent to win the whole thing if they can pull their shit together.  And finishing 11-5 would qualify as pulling their shit together.  Romo will always have the ability to pull off some completely shitty stuff, however, but this may be their year. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on November 22, 2011, 08:19:22 AM
I guess the Pats are back to being badass.


I would not get too ahead on them... this was KC after all.

Look at their previous schedule and compare it to what they have left now. They'll sit fine and dandy at top of their division with the press all over them and their "finally on track" D with no one mentioning how hard they failed facing serious competition.

It'll just make the New England tears from their first round exit all the more sweet.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 22, 2011, 08:26:14 AM
You heard it here first.  Dallas versus New England Superbowl with New England winning it all.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 22, 2011, 08:47:47 AM
I think it's entirely possible that Dallas's talent level has been exaggerated, based purely on results. Dez Bryant and Jason Witten are beasts. Demarcus Ware is really good. The rest? I don't think they've consistently shown they are as good as their press clippings.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 22, 2011, 08:53:11 AM
Well, I certainly wouldn't gamble based on my predictions.  My preseason winner was the Eagles, and we all see how that has worked out. :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 22, 2011, 09:58:04 AM
I think it's entirely possible that Dallas's talent level has been exaggerated, based purely on results. Dez Bryant and Jason Witten are beasts. Demarcus Ware is really good. The rest? I don't think they've consistently shown they are as good as their press clippings.

Uh Demarco Murray?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 22, 2011, 11:43:18 AM
Too few outings to really judge. Beginning of the season, I'd have put Felix Jones in the top 10 running backs. Now? Not so much. The Cowboys have lately shown a remarkable propensity to debut a running to much acclaim only to see him land on the shitpile in 2 years (see Marion Barber).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on November 22, 2011, 11:45:55 AM
ESPN has a nice playoff matrix you can play with.  You can predict each game for the rest of the season if you want.

The tortured assumptions I had to make for the Eagles to win the division puts those odds somewhere in the vicinity of me winning Powerball.  They need a three way 9-7 tie and only 1 more non-division loss.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 22, 2011, 06:47:16 PM
I have a solution for the Bears' QB woes (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7270010/denver-broncos-waive-former-qb-starter-kyle-orton).  :why_so_serious:

That would be some funny shit.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on November 22, 2011, 10:13:02 PM
It would be hilarious.  But it might also make sense!  Maybe it's just me, but I don't think Kyle Orton is a terrible QB.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 22, 2011, 11:18:39 PM
There's too many teams that can pick him up before the Bears can.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on November 22, 2011, 11:33:58 PM
So they'd rather have Brady Quinn as a backup for a primarily running QB?  Smart.  Tebow runs the same risk as Vick does.  Guy is going to take some hits.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 22, 2011, 11:36:41 PM
Orton was expensive to keep around and not play.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 23, 2011, 02:18:29 AM
I'm not sure they actually save anything though, I could swear the thing I read said his contract was guaranteed?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bungee on November 23, 2011, 02:38:32 AM
I'm not sure they actually save anything though, I could swear the thing I read said his contract was guaranteed?

If claimed off waivers: His next team will have to pay his contract fully.
If he's clearing waivers, Denver will have to pay up for anything guaranteed in his contract.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on November 23, 2011, 05:24:04 AM
And I think it was only like 2.5 million for the rest of the year.  Seems a tad foolish to cut him for that kind of money, that's nothing for a QB.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 23, 2011, 07:42:26 AM
It would be hilarious.  But it might also make sense!  Maybe it's just me, but I don't think Kyle Orton is a terrible QB.

I think he's a good QB. He needs a team around him to succeed, but looking at his career numbers, while his completion percentage is under 60%, his TD/INT ratio is respectable. Something like 79/50 or 79/58 or some such. He's really been screwed repeatedly by being in a place that doesn't know how to treat QB's. Chicago is notable for being horrible to QB's and Denver had Josh McDaniels. I think if he played for somebody like Andy Reid or on a team like Green Bay or Detroit that has weapons, he'd be considered a lot better than he has been.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 23, 2011, 08:07:58 AM
I think he's a good QB. He needs a team around him to succeed, but looking at his career numbers, while his completion percentage is under 60%, his TD/INT ratio is respectable. Something like 79/50 or 79/58 or some such. He's really been screwed repeatedly by being in a place that doesn't know how to treat QB's. Chicago is notable for being horrible to QB's and Denver had Josh McDaniels. I think if he played for somebody like Andy Reid or on a team like Green Bay or Detroit that has weapons, he'd be considered a lot better than he has been.

Miami still looking?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 23, 2011, 08:28:05 AM
After the way Matt Moore has played, I'm thinking not. 63% comp. pct., 7 TD, 5 INT. Orton's not going to dramatically improve on that, I don't think. Of the places looking for a QB, his best bets for success are Chicago or Houston (which will depend on how Leinart does this weekend) or Kansas City. Arizona might be interested though Kolb's contract might make that restrictive (plus Kolb is not out for the season). He'd be an improvement in Seattle but it's Seattle, Jacksonville has already tanked their season and are seeing what Gabbert has, Indy probably doesn't want to spend the money though he'd probably be a dramatic improvement, Cleveland probably still believes in Colt McCoy. Hell, if I were Shanahan, I'd pick him up in Washington. How funny would it be if he beat out Rex Grossman for the job? He's certainly a better QB.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on November 23, 2011, 09:13:01 PM
And Kansas City is it!

In other news, Fred Jackson somehow went from having a bruised calf to being out for the rest of the year with a broken leg.   :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on November 24, 2011, 12:49:32 PM
It so sucks being a Packers fan on Thanksgiving and not getting Fox :(

Especially since I do get CBS and get to watch the Leon Lett rematch as I hate the Cowboys and am ambivalent at best to the fish.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 24, 2011, 06:05:41 PM
Okay, so Ndomakong Suh is a complete badass, but he's also completely fucking nuts (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7276717/ndamukong-suh-detroit-lions-ejected-denies-stomped-green-bay-packers-lineman).  His actions today are largely inconsequential when it comes to the possibility of injuring someone.  I'm sure anyone in the NFL would choose to have him half heartedly stomp on them than deliver a full speed, full strength tackle, but the fact that he did this shit is just nuts.  He needs to get his head screwed on straight or he's up for a serious suspension.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 25, 2011, 12:31:05 AM
I saw that play. No fucking excuse for it whatsoever and the refs were right to toss his ass. Crushing the guy's helmet into the turf might have been sort of but not really excusable, but the stomp? No, that looked deliberate to me. The goddamn guy is crazy good, but he's got to curb this shit or guys will just start to provoke him during games to see how much they can get him penalized. And the WHEN he did it was the worst part. You stop them on 3 and goal in a game where your offense has moved the ball well and you hand them a free first down on the 1? DUMBASS.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on November 25, 2011, 01:23:00 AM
And while I agree completely with everything being said about Suh, the thing I can't help thinking is this:  If you are going to doing something stupid like stomp/kick the guy, at least do it like you mean it.  The stomp he gave would have barely hurt a toddler.  Still a justified expulsion, but you coulda at least got your money worth, fella.  And boy is it going to cost you some money.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on November 25, 2011, 02:46:43 AM
As a Lions fan, I'm pissed at Suh for that.  Seriously, dude, you are a professional now.  Act like it.  If the other team is beating you, take your beating like a man.  Or maybe Suh has bought into his own hype.  Does this mean another meeting with the commissioner? "Gosh commish, if I knew that stomping someone's head was FROWNED UPON IN THIS ESTABLISHMENT, I wouldn't have done it."

In actual football news, the Fins gave the Boys all they could handle.  It was a good game and give credit to the Boys for winning games they need to win (looking at you Titans and Ravens).  I'm going to go ahead and give the NFC East to the Cowboys because the Giants are inconsistent.

First total Cowboys game I've seen this year and JESUS CHRIST IT'S DEMARCUS WARE, GET IN THE CAR!
He is amazing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on November 26, 2011, 06:33:12 AM
The Lions are back to their old tricks, mentally undisciplined football with lots of penalties.  Suh was the one that will get all the press for good reason, but the Lions have been penalty ridden for the last month.   Talent can only get you so far.  I don't know if they need a new coach, or what, but someone has to teach these man children to control themselves.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on November 27, 2011, 12:11:05 PM
Bengals losing to the Browns I see.  Good to know I wasn't wrong about them this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on November 27, 2011, 12:13:21 PM
Heh, Leinart lasted two quarters.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 27, 2011, 02:00:46 PM
Tebow has the Chargers right where he wants them :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on November 27, 2011, 03:29:58 PM
Missed field goal by the Chargers... please no Tebow Time.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on November 27, 2011, 03:56:12 PM
What the hell CBS, I don't want to watch Tebow.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on November 27, 2011, 03:59:29 PM
What the hell CBS, I don't want to watch Tebow.
I actually wanted to watch 60 minutes  :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Abagadro on November 27, 2011, 04:39:21 PM
They should have fired Norv last year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on November 27, 2011, 04:40:38 PM
They should have fired Norv last year.

They should never have hired him in the first place.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: stu on November 27, 2011, 04:42:09 PM
Quinn must be a douche because Tebow had a look on his face like For the love of Christ, shut the fuck up, Brady. while they were sitting on the bench.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: DLRiley on November 27, 2011, 04:55:28 PM
TE-BONE!!  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 27, 2011, 06:52:09 PM
Loved it, loved every second of the gnashing of teeth over Tebow. I really hope he makes the playoffs so all the analysts' heads explode.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on November 27, 2011, 07:32:20 PM
Not to mention Elway's head.  You just know the front office was hoping Tebow would implode so they could draft a QB in the first round next year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on November 27, 2011, 07:47:37 PM
Loved it, loved every second of the gnashing of teeth over Tebow. I really hope he makes the playoffs so all the analysts' heads explode.

In the gushing over QBs as the premier skill position, and the way head coaches have basically been promoted to minor divinities, the fact that QBs have to actually be team leaders gets left out. 

Tebow is pretty mediocre on a good day, but his team certainly believes in him.  Compare that to the Jets... Sanchez is basically second fiddle to the head coach and I'm not sure Vick could lead his team to the showers despite the ridiculous talent level.

Not to mention Elway's head.  You just know the front office was hoping Tebow would implode so they could draft a QB in the first round next year.

Management is laughing all the way to the bank, as people are actually talking about the Broncos.  If they want to draft a QB next year, they'll go ahead and do it.  As soon as defenses figure out Tebow and the fans grumble, they'll have casus belli to pull him.

The novelty of Tebow has turned a shitty/rebuilding year into a year where the Broncos get talked about, pull in eyeballs, and sell merch.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Hoax on November 27, 2011, 08:03:12 PM
Loved it, loved every second of the gnashing of teeth over Tebow. I really hope he makes the playoffs so all the analysts' heads explode.

Yes its because you hate analysts...  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 27, 2011, 08:07:51 PM
Loved it, loved every second of the gnashing of teeth over Tebow. I really hope he makes the playoffs so all the analysts' heads explode.

Yes its because you hate analysts...  :oh_i_see:

Don't get me wrong, I love all the god-haters getting all panty-bunched about him too. However, you have to remember that I absolutely couldn't stand the guy, god-squad or not when he was at Florida.

For me it's about watching all the NFL people who can't understand how people can win when they aren't heaving up the ball 40 times a game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 27, 2011, 10:39:13 PM
Shane Lechler of the Raiders had an 80 yard punt :-o He kicked it standing on about the 11 yard line and it hit the ground at about the 5 yard line and rolled into the end zone.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Abagadro on November 28, 2011, 12:31:16 AM
You don't have to be a "god-hater" to be annoyed with Tebow's ridiculously ostentatious displays of religiosity.  Hey Tim, God probably doesn't give a fuck who wins a football game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on November 28, 2011, 12:45:47 AM
My question is, does Tebow need the entire game to charge up his powers, or can the Bronco's find an actual QB for the first 3 quarters and just put Tebow in the fourth?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 28, 2011, 05:53:00 AM
The way it's going for them they could probably put in a cardboard cutout for the first three quarters. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 28, 2011, 06:05:59 AM
My question is, does Tebow need the entire game to charge up his powers, or can the Bronco's find an actual QB for the first 3 quarters and just put Tebow in the fourth?  :why_so_serious:

The holy trilogy has to fit in somewhere here.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on November 28, 2011, 06:15:19 AM
Yay! My home team won the cup in that other Football league!

First time the host city's team has won in about 18 years, which is suprising with a league of only 10 teams. You and your silly sub 50 year old championships, that was the 99th Grey Cup.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on November 28, 2011, 08:12:10 AM
My question is, does Tebow need the entire game to charge up his powers, or can the Bronco's find an actual QB for the first 3 quarters and just put Tebow in the fourth?  :why_so_serious:

One of the announcers commented this weekend, "Someone should always tell him it's the Fourth Quarter."


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 28, 2011, 10:15:33 AM
You know what? The Jets could use Tim Tebow.  :why_so_serious: Actually, I'm quite serious. He seems to be a better passer than Mark Slang-chez. If Buffalo's defense was even REMOTELY good, they would have won that game yesterday. Sanchez throws 4 TDs but looked like shit all game. The Bills gifted them a TD with that fucked up kick/onside kick. I think the Jets continuing to be in the hunt is more infuriating to me than Denver's Teboning of a really crappy division. And unlike Greene/McKnight, Tebow can actually run the ball so put him in and bench Sanchez.

San Diego is just a bad football team. Rivers can't make up for their dearth of talent and lack of depth at wideout anymore, not with an O line that can't pass block and a run game that could generously be called sparse. Norv Turner should not have been coaching this team this season and I can't understand why he's still coaching them today. You lost to a COLLEGE QB but hey, in that shitty division, you apparently have much company. And let none of the Tebowed forget that he's beaten three really bad teams (Miami, KC and San Diego), beat two middling inconsistent teams (Oakland and the Jets) and lost badly to the only good team they've played since Green Bay week 4. I expect Chicago to do SOMETHING defensively against him in two weeks, and probably still lose because they have Todd Hainie as QB.

Green Bay and San Fran are 1-2 games from clinching their divisions and Green Bay almost certainly has the #1 seed. Tonight's game could likely all but cinch both the NFC East and the NFC South if New Orleans wins, or throw those divisions into complete chaos again.

Houston, oh Houston. You are CURSED. If Leinart is done for the season too, what's left on the trash heap to pick up? Maybe David Carr is out there waiting in the wings. Still, you can hand the rock to Arians Foster 30 times a game and probably win out. None of the 6-5 teams in the AFC thrill me at all, but Cincy has such a tough schedule compared to the others that I think it's possible a 9-7 or 8-8 gets one team into the playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on November 28, 2011, 10:22:58 AM
My question is, does Tebow need the entire game to charge up his powers, or can the Bronco's find an actual QB for the first 3 quarters and just put Tebow in the fourth?  :why_so_serious:

God hates the Broncos, so he doesn't tune in until the fourth quarter.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: murdoc on November 28, 2011, 10:43:46 AM
Yay! My home team won the cup in that other Football league!

First time the host city's team has won in about 18 years, which is suprising with a league of only 10 teams. You and your silly sub 50 year old championships, that was the 99th Grey Cup.

But 75% of the league makes the playoffs!

edit: ...and it's only 8 teams.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 28, 2011, 11:16:07 AM
They should just include all the teams in the playoffs with only 10 teams.  Hell, that wouldn't even touch the number of playoff teams that most US sports have.  

Edit:  What kind of wonky league only has 8 teams? 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on November 28, 2011, 11:48:10 AM
To be fair, I haven't been much of a fan since the league had ten teams. Went to 14 straight games in the Flutie era.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on November 28, 2011, 11:58:56 AM
Canadian football league: where even with less than a dozen teams, they had two teams with effectively the same name!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Stewie on November 28, 2011, 01:45:49 PM
The whole cfl name issue always reminds me of this segment from almost live
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lVeMI9nBb0k
start about 40 seconds in....

Anyways this is an NFL thread so I need to point out how much I hate the Steelers.
Last night watching the game, with 2 minutes left and me up by half a point my GF says "you are going to win this week in the pool, as long as pitt's offense doesn't get back on the field"

I then point out that my opponent also has the Steelers def (he is a big Steelers fan so he has Mendenhall, Wallace and their def)   
with 20 seconds to go pitt gets a pick. I lose by 1.5 points.

I hate the Steelers.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 28, 2011, 08:45:15 PM
Thanks Saints! The gift basket is the in the mail.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 28, 2011, 08:53:29 PM
Somebody's figuring out what it's like to be on the wrong side of god (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7292512/john-elway-surprised-reaction-tim-tebow-radio-remark)........ :why_so_serious:

We should all be scared when little "timmy" gets involved in politics. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 28, 2011, 09:16:16 PM
Choke it down, you Stanford weasel!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Montague on November 28, 2011, 09:30:20 PM
Ingram's 35 yard TD run at the end of the game got me a .7 point victory that clinched the playoffs. I didnt have Ingram, I had John Kasay - the extra point put me over.  :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on November 28, 2011, 10:29:46 PM
Manning's garbage time toss to Jake Ballard lost me the game in the JV league.  Thanks, dick.

edit: ohh shit, I'll be in first in the main league now.  Thanks, Nebu.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 29, 2011, 07:25:13 AM
Some early season quotes and predictions that may give you a good laugh from earlier in the thread.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 29, 2011, 07:59:14 AM
To be fair, NO ONE picked the 49ers to be anything but awful, at least not that I can think of. And I did say that Arizona and St. Louis would fight it out to be 7-9. At the time, I didn't realize the Rams had hired Josh "I wish I was Mike Martz" McDaniels to end Sam Bradford's career early or that Kolb would really stink that bad on a really bad Arizona team. As for Baltimore, I still am not convinced by them. Flacco is a slightly more accurate version of Sanchez but at least he has a premier back in Ray Rice to hand off/throw to.

Oh shit, Suh got a 2-game suspension (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7293935/ndamukong-suh-detroit-lions-suspended-two-games-pay). One of those games is Minnesota so that won't be a big deal, but the other is New Orleans. Both Detroit and Chicago look like they might be trying to piss a wildcard spot away. The Giants are praying for that now, but the schedule is really fucking them hard the next month. Atlanta may be in the best position to swoop in and steal it, but at least the Giants will have the two winnable games against Dallas to make a serious run for the East title.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 29, 2011, 08:26:01 AM
Suh has got to be on some special roid concoction that they can't detect.  That guy has some serious issues.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on November 29, 2011, 08:51:33 AM
Some early season quotes and predictions that may give you a good laugh from earlier in the thread.


Love it!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 29, 2011, 08:56:15 AM
Hey, the Eagles can still win the Superbowl....   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 29, 2011, 09:11:16 AM
I think it's funny how much we bought into the Rams, and how I believed Kolb would be THE ANSWER!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 29, 2011, 09:13:23 AM
I missed on SF (along with the rest of the English speaking world). The rest is pretty close, although the Rams are worse than I thought. I was definitely right about Andy Reid  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on November 29, 2011, 09:16:29 AM
Hey, the Eagles can still win the Superbowl....   :oh_i_see:

 :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bungee on November 29, 2011, 09:17:37 AM
With the way this season unfolded up to now, we know 2 things for certain:
Mike Singletary is a bad Head Coach.
Peyton Manning should be voted League MVP

Also, Del Rio fired, Jaguars to be sold. (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82493c0b/article/jaguars-fire-coach-del-rio-after-eightplus-seasons-?module=HP11_cp) And the new owner promised to keep the franchise in Jacksonville  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bungee on November 29, 2011, 09:17:58 AM
Quoted myself...
Well, I'll just throw it out here then: even though I'm a Steelers fan, I think they'll be 1-and-done in the Playoffs this year. Ben can't do everything and he's really beat up.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 29, 2011, 09:27:34 AM
With the way this season unfolded up to now, we know 2 things for certain:
Mike Singletary is a bad Head Coach.
Peyton Manning should be voted League MVP

Also, Del Rio fired, Jaguars to be sold. (http://www.nfl.com/news/story/09000d5d82493c0b/article/jaguars-fire-coach-del-rio-after-eightplus-seasons-?module=HP11_cp) And the new owner promised to keep the franchise in Jacksonville  :why_so_serious:

There is a Burrough in LA named Jacksonville? That is so cool....  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 29, 2011, 09:28:41 AM
I stand by my prediction that the NFC West would be the hardest division to pick this year.


Even though I picked the Cards to go to the Super Bowl  :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 29, 2011, 11:23:02 AM
Kolb was a steaming pile of shit. 

(http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/80s/sites/tampabay.com.blogs.80s/files/images/typepad-legacy-files/52199.6a00d83451b05569e20133edbc8aec970b-450wi.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on November 29, 2011, 03:00:12 PM
After last night's game, I've concluded that (surprisingly) the problem with the Giants is everything but Eli Manning.... which has been made more apparent by injuries to the few other good players they have.  Eli is putting up good numbers despite only having Nicks/Manningham (they count as one person, as one or the other is always hurt) and a crowd of rookies to throw to and a pitiful running game.

If they lose out, Coughlin won't get credit for overachieving with what he had to work with.


If Tuck and the rest on injured reserve can get healthy, they can still make the playoffs...  and I don't think that collection of players has any reasonable right to be in the playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on November 29, 2011, 04:10:48 PM
I suspect Coughlin will be gone, yeah, which makes me a little sad. I really like that old coot.


As for the "lawl predictions," Kerry Collins managed to disappoint me one final time. Go in peace, you fucking bastard.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 29, 2011, 08:30:06 PM
I think Coughlin stays unless the Giants TOTALLY collapse and only win like 1 more game. Their injuries have really killed them this year, especially at RB and WR, but their defense has been suspect for years. Suspect in that if they don't get pressure from the front 4, their defense will give up lots of big plays. Their depth at RB comes down to "Is Brandon Jacobs awake enough to see the hole when Bradshaw goes down?" They really need to draft a running back #1, someone that can be a marquee back for the next five years.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on November 29, 2011, 08:34:15 PM
I hear Tiki Barber is available.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 29, 2011, 08:38:34 PM
I said 5 years not 5 snaps.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 30, 2011, 08:41:08 AM
They've been trying to fire Coughlin even before he ended up winning a Super Bowl.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on November 30, 2011, 10:22:08 AM
They've been trying to fire Coughlin even before he ended up winning a Super Bowl.

I'm pretty sure Norv gets the boot first befor Coughlin.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on November 30, 2011, 10:38:20 AM
So now that the Coughlin rumors are flying, I assume they'll make the super bowl again.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 30, 2011, 10:41:35 AM
They've been trying to fire Coughlin even before he ended up winning a Super Bowl.
I'm pretty sure Norv gets the boot first befor Coughlin.

Better yet, here's a fun game. Put these coaches in order of who gets fired first. Tony Sparano, Norv Turner, Tom Coughlin, Jim Caldwell, Andy Reid, Mike Shanahan, Leslie Frazar, Raheem Morris.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 30, 2011, 11:06:17 AM
I think Reid, Shanahan, Morris and Caldwell (despite how bad Indy is) don't get fired. Frazier probably not either because he hasn't really had any time to make enough changes for anything to have turned around. Sporano and Turner are gone, but Turner will be after the season I think. Coughlin is on the bubble but likely not gone. He hasn't spent a day in New York when there wasn't someone saying he was about to be gone, including the day after the Super Bowl.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 30, 2011, 11:09:58 AM
I think Caldwell is doomed. There's no way he makes it out of this year when they can't even compete because one guy went down.

Shanahan has done nothing he promised for the Redskins. Washington was a 6-10 team when he showed up and they will probably be a 6-10 team again this year. That's not good enough in a division that produced 11 playoff teams over the last five years, with a shot at 2 more this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 30, 2011, 11:11:13 AM
Indy feels more like a fire-the-GM than a fire-the-coach to me, but it could be a fire-both.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on November 30, 2011, 12:30:51 PM
Indy feels more like a fire-the-GM than a fire-the-coach to me, but it could be a fire-both.

Well, they did just fire their defensive coordinator.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 30, 2011, 12:48:59 PM
I really think they are going to do everything they can to not fire Caldwell and the GM, even if the team goes 0-16. I get the feeling they really like the coach and front office and are letting a lot of the losing go by without wanting to shitcan the whole thing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on November 30, 2011, 01:09:36 PM
I feel like the front office is really who you need to point the finger at when it comes to 'why does this team have no good players besides Manning?'


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on November 30, 2011, 01:45:25 PM
Damnit ingmar, you changed your avatar. Now I have to read who posted!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on November 30, 2011, 01:53:13 PM
Here's why I think Caldwell should be fired:

2002-2008? 10, 12, 12, 14, 12, 13, 12 in regular season wins. 5 division titles. 7 playoff victories and a Super Bowl title.

Then Caldwell shows up. 14 wins in the first season, AFC Champions, Super Bowl loss.
Next season, 10 wins, win the division, bust out in the first round of the playoffs. Things were turning here and nobody saw it.
This season, fucking disaster. 0-16 in all liklihood, which would tie the dubious honor set by the Lions in 2008.

You can't go 0-16. You can't do that and keep your job. Rod Marinelli didn't and he was the head coach for the same amount of time.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on November 30, 2011, 01:57:08 PM
Sorry, Way - Sidney Rice done for the year (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7299714/seattle-seahawks-place-wr-sidney-rice-concussion-ir). Kind of not-unexpected though. The guy now has two seasons where he hasn't been able to play a full year, and he was supposed to be their big weapon. Instead, some rookie named Doug Baldwin leads the team in catches, yards, and is tied with 4 other guys for TD's. And somehow, Tarvaris Jackson has been BETTER than Whitehurst, making that trade look like the dumbest fucking move on the planet. What'd they trade for him, a 3rd rounder? How would this have been worse than keeping Hasselbeck?

As for the Colts, the big mistakes their front office fell into were not looking for a replacement for Addai who hasn't been the same since his injuries started in his second year, and not drafting or signing D linemen with size and strength enough to stop the run. They've gotten good wideouts (Garcon, Collie, Gonzalez) who haven't been able to stay healthy enough to make an impact. I don't think tailoring their offense around Manning was a mistake, but tailoring their defense around always being ahead is what's really made that defense bad.

EDIT: I think people did see the cracks in the Colts' superiority forming last year when all their wideouts got hurt and Clark was gone for the year. Gonzalez was a #1 pick and he hasn't played a part for a season and a half. Clark only has 28 catches on 49 targets this year and is hurt again. Even Manning couldn't save their season last year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on November 30, 2011, 02:03:49 PM
I agree that you have to fire the 0-16 coach, unless it was a contrived occurrence.........    :tinfoil:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on November 30, 2011, 02:41:29 PM
Quote
- Sidney Rice done for the year.

No more than I expected. What a fucking retarded signing, along with Miller. Let's hire some really expensive ball catchers and then make them completely useless by installing a QB who on his very best day might crack the top 25 in the league. FIRE PETE CARROL PLSTIA.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on November 30, 2011, 02:41:52 PM
You fire everybody after 0-16. If you can't win ONE fucking game, then your team is broken from the ground up and needs a massive reboot.


Even god damn Miami has won a fucking game. MIAMI!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on November 30, 2011, 11:05:55 PM
The problem with Jim Caldwell is that the man hasn't spoken a word, blinked, farted or even breathed over the last three years.  Seriously, the guy is undead or something...he just fucking stands there.  I have a feeling that even when the game is over and the cameras are turned off, he still just fucking stands there, doing nothing, saying nothing.  Not only did the Colts lose their QB and best player when Peyton went down, they also lost their Head Coach Offensive Coordinator at the same time.  Has Jim Caldwell even performed a single coach-like act ever?

On Miami:  Those are some scrappy motherfuckers.  Say what you want about Sparano - and he probably deserves much of it - but he has those guys fighting for him. Caldwell could learn a thing or two from this guy.

Shanahan - I'd be willing to give him a couple years.  They need to figure out how to get their hands on a decent QB. 

Coughlin - always in the spotlight, because that's what you get for being the Giants coach.  Talent waxes and wanes on NFL teams, and I think he has certainly done a better than average job of keeping this team competitive.  I wouldn't fire him until his age starts to become a major issue.  Maybe it is already?

Reid - Fuck no, I wouldn't fire him.  Guy knows how to win football games...this year is a year of front office blunders and team chemistry issues.  He isn't blameless, but considering his history, I'd give him one more year.  Better yet, fire him and let Seattle take him.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 01, 2011, 02:10:11 PM
Drew Magary, one of my favorite writers at Deadspin, weighs in on Norv:

Quote
How the fuck does Norv still have a job? How was he not fired before he had a chance to call that insane Mike Tolbert sweep in overtime last week? THE WHOLE CITY OF SAN DIEGO SHOULD BE FIRED FOR NOT GOING TO THE POLICE AND PREVENTING THIS. He's undoubtedly the worst coach of the past two decades. He stands alone now. He's worse than Childress. He's worse than Fontes. He's worse than Kotite. He's worse than Andy Reid. He's the fucking SHITTIEST OF THE SHIT. His continued presence on an NFL sideline offends me as a human being.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on December 01, 2011, 02:15:29 PM

Coughlin - always in the spotlight, because that's what you get for being the Giants coach.  Talent waxes and wanes on NFL teams, and I think he has certainly done a better than average job of keeping this team competitive.  I wouldn't fire him until his age starts to become a major issue.  Maybe it is already?



As a Giants fan, I can't understand my fellow fans wanting to axe him.  He has done a pretty darn good job, I can't think of a reason to fire him.  The Giants have had subpar second halves most years, I suppose that is true, but I don't think its a big Coughlin thing.  I actually think Manning isn't a great cold weather QB - the super bowl year was the exception not the rule.   Anyway, the other question is - who is available who would do better? No one, that is who.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 01, 2011, 02:18:35 PM
Drew Magary, one of my favorite writers at Deadspin, weighs in on Norv:

Quote
How the fuck does Norv still have a job? How was he not fired before he had a chance to call that insane Mike Tolbert sweep in overtime last week? THE WHOLE CITY OF SAN DIEGO SHOULD BE FIRED FOR NOT GOING TO THE POLICE AND PREVENTING THIS. He's undoubtedly the worst coach of the past two decades. He stands alone now. He's worse than Childress. He's worse than Fontes. He's worse than Kotite. He's worse than Andy Reid. He's the fucking SHITTIEST OF THE SHIT. His continued presence on an NFL sideline offends me as a human being.

How quickly we forget the Mikes (Nolan and Singletary.)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on December 01, 2011, 02:58:10 PM

Coughlin - always in the spotlight, because that's what you get for being the Giants coach.  Talent waxes and wanes on NFL teams, and I think he has certainly done a better than average job of keeping this team competitive.  I wouldn't fire him until his age starts to become a major issue.  Maybe it is already?



As a Giants fan, I can't understand my fellow fans wanting to axe him.  He has done a pretty darn good job, I can't think of a reason to fire him.  The Giants have had subpar second halves most years, I suppose that is true, but I don't think its a big Coughlin thing.  I actually think Manning isn't a great cold weather QB - the super bowl year was the exception not the rule.   Anyway, the other question is - who is available who would do better? No one, that is who.

No sane fan should want Coughlin gone, but it's the Giants and the NYC media market.  They have ridiculous expectations to live up to.  On the flip side, everyone just expects the Jets to be awful so even a poor to mediocre season (even if you massively underperform) is fine because the Jets are supposed to be the second stringers.

Injuries have been a recurring problem with the Giants the last few years...  last year, the WRs (Smith, Hicks, Manningham) were all out for good chunks.  Eli had the foot injury.  Bradshaw has missed big chunks of time, as well as various O-Line starters... part of the reason everyone loves Snee is he was versatile enough to cover some of the glaring injury holes.


Looking at the other coaches on that list, there is no sane reason why Coughlin should be there. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 01, 2011, 05:23:05 PM
So since McNabb got cut, if you were Chicago would you take him?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 01, 2011, 05:41:36 PM
Hard call. I've always liked McNabb but I think he may be well and truly done at this point.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 01, 2011, 05:56:43 PM
Even when your only shot at the playoffs is a crappy backup?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 01, 2011, 05:57:42 PM
I'm not totally convinced at this point if McNabb would actually be better is my point. The backup at least knows their playbook etc.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 01, 2011, 07:12:43 PM
Go Seahawks!  :awesome_for_real:

EDIT: AAAAAAaaaaand Vince Young still blows. I still look back on that USC v. Texas game with him and Leinart and think, wow, WTF happened guys?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on December 01, 2011, 08:00:24 PM
I really like Coughlin, but I also know that once the NY media decides the coach is the problem, nothing short of winning a Superbowl is going to stop them from making sure the guy is chased out of town.

The Jets thing is so true, I remember having that discussion with my father when they (the media) was hyperfocused on driving Reeves (I think it was Reeves) out. The Jets were way more awful than they should've been, and my father could not understand why everyone seemed so intent on blaming Reeves for all the Giants sins (I want to say it was a Year of Injuries) but giving the Jets coach a free pass. I was like, "Because it's the Jets, they've sucked forever, they're USED to the Jets sucking." It was the only explanation that made any sense.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 02, 2011, 07:42:21 AM
So since McNabb got cut, if you were Chicago would you take him?

Fuck no. I'm officially off the McNabb bandwagon. He couldn't succeed with a stud RB like Peterson and at least ONE receiving weapon in Harvin. Put him on the Bears with O line issues and no wideout weapons of note and he will find a way to throw the ball UNDER the ground.

EDIT: ROFL Eagles. You let Pete Carroll's bizarre Frankenstein's monster of a team obliterate you. You made Tarvaris Jackson look competent. Congratulations. Doggie Karma strikes again.  :why_so_serious:

Also, I've thought it insane for years now that every time the Giants don't win 12 games, there's this siren shrieking for Coughlin's head. I shudder to think how bad this team could have been without him. Hopefully, the Giants won't have to find out next year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on December 02, 2011, 08:12:52 AM
Go Seahawks!  :awesome_for_real:

EDIT: AAAAAAaaaaand Vince Young still blows. I still look back on that USC v. Texas game with him and Leinart and think, wow, WTF happened guys?

Ok, I no longer have any vested interest in the season so I can just enjoy it without angst!  Silver lining and everything....plus I had Marshawn in 2 out of 3 FF leagues (not the F13 one, though).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on December 02, 2011, 08:21:57 AM
Even when your only shot at the playoffs is a crappy backup?

Crappy backup might be better than McNabb.  He hasn't shown anything resembling his former level of ability in 3 years.  Rex Grossman was a clear upgrade over him in Washington.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 02, 2011, 10:45:58 AM
Marshawn must have finally found the local Applebee's.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on December 04, 2011, 09:52:18 AM
I get the Broncos game this week!  Probably should be a better watch than watching NE piss on the Colts...  though it is always interesting to watch the Patriots O work.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 04, 2011, 09:56:45 AM
I get the Falcons and the Texans. Yippie.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on December 04, 2011, 10:51:43 AM
I get the Falcons and the Texans. Yippie.

Aren't the Falcons and the Texans two comparable teams with some playoff hopes? 


The best part about the 1:00PM games? 

I live in Upstate NY, and the Bills are never broadcast.  No one gives a shit about the Bills even in Upstate...  for that matter I'm not sure about the city of Buffalo.  Maybe we could trade it to Canada for some better property, or fence it in to make a giant penal colony/reality show.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 04, 2011, 01:42:00 PM
Tebow still chugging along with god power. :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on December 04, 2011, 04:38:42 PM
Good thing the Refs are Green Bay fans.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on December 04, 2011, 04:53:08 PM
Well they are a very easy team to like!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on December 04, 2011, 04:56:06 PM
I think that post is considered a hold on that packers.  Next week we'll call it against someone.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on December 04, 2011, 06:06:01 PM
Nice timeout there Coach Garrett.

Edit: nice


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on December 04, 2011, 06:21:23 PM
No one wants to win the NFC East.  Surprised to see the Fins beat the Raidas like a drum today.  Tebow cracks me up, but hey, he's winning.  Got to be a good time if you're a Broncos fan. 

Currently watching the Lions go off the rails after a good defensive first quarter.  With the loss of Atl and Chi, the Lions have a real chance at getting the wild card, but I guess they don't want it.  But the Saints are scary good and very well coached.

NFC looks really good to win the Super Bowl;  Niners, Saints and of course the Packers are awesome teams.  But there can be only one.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on December 04, 2011, 06:31:19 PM
It sounded like the Giants played hard, they just left too much time for Rodgers.

Edit: NO already has 304 yards of offense at the end of the first half.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on December 04, 2011, 07:07:41 PM
It sounded like the Giants played hard, they just left too much time for Rodgers.

He only had about a minute.  The Giants D just allowed the Packers two huge plays.  Really, about half way through the fourth, both team's defenses were putty after getting worked on by good QBs having good days.


It was a great football game, and both Rodgers and Eli were playing great football.  The Cowboys lost, so the NFC East is likely to come down to the Cowboys/Giants head to head games....  which is great for fans.

Obviously, Paelos is going to have to sacrifice more virgins to Abacus.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 04, 2011, 07:17:02 PM
Meh, Cowboys ALWAYS have problems with Arizona. They have for as long as I can remember. And no, I have no idea why. It's sort of like how the Braves constantly struggle against the Nationals for some god-awful voodoo reason.

The good news is the rest of the NFC East took a week off. I'm just marking this as another one off the calendar, and another one closer to the head-to-head matches with the Giants that will decide the division.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 04, 2011, 08:08:34 PM
Also, Detroit has lost complete control of their team.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on December 04, 2011, 08:58:57 PM
Yes they are now the Raiders of the NFC.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: DLRiley on December 05, 2011, 05:42:47 AM
TEEE-BONE!!!  :drill:

....  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 05, 2011, 08:32:13 AM
Way to make me sweat, Rodgers! That was a good game. I was actually sweating it for the Pack, but they came back and did the business in style. Rodgers really wasn't having a great day. Lots of dropped balls, some missed throws and you could tell the Giants playing so much coverage was wearing on him. The worrying thing was the injury to Starks. Neither Seine or Grant are the kind of punishing back the Packers need to close out games. And that defense... holy shit, the Packers really have got to get their defense straight. If Woodson is seriously hurt, their secondary is not playing well (and Woodson was having a bad day too). Peprah and Burnett are decent safeties, but they got exploited deep yesterday multiple times. Brees and New Orleans might have won that game, although their defense is worse than the Giants so maybe not.

Dallas...  :why_so_serious: The worst opponent Dallas can face is themselves. They are just a cluster fuck. No one wants to win the NFC East, but good for the fans and the TV ratings that the division will come down to two head to head games late in the season. There's absolutely no way to call the games either, because both teams can play fantastic football before swallowing their own tongues, falling on the floor and writhing to their painful deaths at any minute.

The Falcons are a complete headscratcher. They go out and get the deep threat weapon they felt they lacked last year and suddenly, Matt Ryan can't hit the broad side of a barn. In the first half, there were four deep bomb plays that should have either been caught for long yards or touchdowns that weren't because Ryan couldn't hit a wide open guy. Hell, the first three plays of the game were all deep shots that were missed by Ryan. The playcalling is schizophrenic. Either you're a run first playaction team, or you're a vertical team that can run, but they can't seem to decide which to be. Their O line does a poor job of protection and they don't run nearly enough. Ryan's throwing too many picks and he's getting sacked more. They really need to rein it in, run the ball a lot more and playaction off of that.

Detroit has just lost their goddamn minds. There needs to be like miles of laps being run today in practice because there are guys on that team who are KILLING that team with stupid, dick-waving penalties. Their lack of running game is hurting them, but they didn't run the ball badly. Not having a plan B when Calvin Johnson is triple covered is hurting them a lot. They could have really given New Orleans a run for their money had it not been for the preponderance of stupid penalties. Lucky for them that no one else seems to want to win the wild card either.

The Bears are fucking done. No Cutler and now no Forte? Forget about it. Games they should win (Denver, Seattle and Minnesota) I'm now not entirely sure they can win. Denver is going to win an ugly 6-3 game or some shit, Seattle will probably win another close one only because they play in Chicago, we know Green Bay will win unless they rest players (which is a possibility given that Green Bay will likely have nothing to play for other than undefeated) and Minnesota might give them a game if Peterson is back. So Chicago could go 0-4, 1-3 or 2-2 down the stretch and if they don't go at least 3-1, they are out of the playoffs most likely.

Fucking Raiders. Please win the division just so I don't have to watch The Florida Gators Denver Broncos in the playoffs. How the hell is Miami playing this good? I must have been right about the Dolphins' choice to go pass happy early in the season being the wrong choice because they ran the ball 44 times and beat the shit out of the Raiders. Matt Moore is pretty quietly playing decent QB and guess what Fins fans? That might be your QB for the next few years since you've lost the Luck sweepstakes.

Houston's defense is a lot better than I thought it would be, but I don't think they can go very far with T.J. Yates as their QB - not against teams like Pittsburgh or Baltimore. Just based on the schedules, I think Denver is actually going to win the AFC West and the Bengals might make the playoffs. The last weekend will have some HUGE games - Jets/Miami, Titans/Houston and Cincy/Baltimore are going to be the games that decide that final wild card spot. Right now, the tiebreakers go to Cincy and if all the teams go 2-2 like I expect, that might not change. I'm actually hoping for the Raiders or the Titans to get the final playoff spot because I don't really want to see the Jets or Cincy in the playoffs again.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on December 05, 2011, 08:35:54 AM


Detroit has just lost their goddamn minds. There needs to be like miles of laps being run today in practice because there are guys on that team who are KILLING that team with stupid, dick-waving penalties.

Detroit has been this way for quite a while, it is just that they are finally otherwise good enough that it is the penalties hosing them.   They did have it under control earlier in the season, which was remarkable at the time to me.  But this looks to me less like losing their minds and more like return to business as usual.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on December 05, 2011, 09:45:40 AM
I'm actually hoping for the Raiders or the Titans to get the final playoff spot because I don't really want to see the Jets or Cincy in the playoffs again.

Aw, c'mon who DOESN'T love the one-and-done show that the Bengals make in playoffs?   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 05, 2011, 11:06:59 AM
Detroit has just lost their goddamn minds. There needs to be like miles of laps being run today in practice because there are guys on that team who are KILLING that team with stupid, dick-waving penalties.

Detroit has been this way for quite a while, it is just that they are finally otherwise good enough that it is the penalties hosing them.   They did have it under control earlier in the season, which was remarkable at the time to me.  But this looks to me less like losing their minds and more like return to business as usual.

Nobody shoves a referee even when you're a complete thug. My jaw was on the floor when that happened late in the game after all the other shit that had gone on. The fact that didn't eject him immediately was astounding. He'll get his ass fined by the league.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 05, 2011, 11:27:12 AM
Yeah, he should have been ejected. At the very least, the coach should have told him to hit the fucking showers for being such a retard.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 05, 2011, 11:40:10 AM
Yeah, he should have been ejected. At the very least, the coach should have told him to hit the fucking showers for being such a retard.

Detroit's coach doesn't exactly have room to tell people to calm down after chasing Harbaugh off the field after a botched handshake


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: SnakeCharmer on December 07, 2011, 10:28:45 AM
You can now buy Packers stock and become an NFL co-owner!

Bought 1 share  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 07, 2011, 11:09:21 AM
I would have loved to get some Packers stock, but I think they sold out in like 11 minutes.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: SnakeCharmer on December 07, 2011, 11:56:05 AM
Bought it an hour or two ago.  Should still be some available.  250 bucks though.  That was a hard sell to the wife.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 07, 2011, 12:01:32 PM
Yeah, $250 was the other part of it. Christmas presents supercede vanity stock.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on December 08, 2011, 05:11:26 AM
Presents?  Why not just divert a few hundred out of your IRA if you want to own Packers stock that bad?  You're old now, start thinking like it.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 08, 2011, 05:41:19 AM
Yeah, $250 was the other part of it. Christmas presents supercede vanity stock.

It's a stock so it's an investment.  It could appreciate in value.

Edit:  Sometimes you people are entirely too serious. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: SnakeCharmer on December 08, 2011, 07:54:58 AM
Yeah, $250 was the other part of it. Christmas presents supercede vanity stock.

It's a stock so it's an investment.  It could appreciate in value.

It won't appreciate at all.  They were pretty clear and upfront about it.  It is basically the same thing as taking 250 bucks and lighting it on fire.  But you can legally say you're a NFL co-owner, and by all rights you are.  But it's never going to appreciate, pay dividends or anything else.  It is only loosely defined as a stock and not publicly traded on the NYSE or anything.  Haemish is absolutely right that's a vanity thing only.

This is right under the "I WANT TO PURCHASE STOCK IN GREEN BAY PACKERS, INC"
Quote
COMMON STOCK DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN INVESTMENT IN “STOCK” IN THE COMMON SENSE OF THE TERM.

PURCHASERS SHOULD NOT PURCHASE COMMON STOCK WITH THE PURPOSE OF MAKING A PROFIT.

Then also this in the FAQ


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on December 08, 2011, 08:12:25 AM
God I both wish I had known about the offering and had the spare cash.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on December 08, 2011, 08:39:24 AM
Yeah, $250 was the other part of it. Christmas presents supercede vanity stock.

It's a stock so it's an investment.  It could appreciate in value.

It won't appreciate at all.  They were pretty clear and upfront about it.  It is basically the same thing as taking 250 bucks and lighting it on fire.  But you can legally say you're a NFL co-owner, and by all rights you are.  But it's never going to appreciate, pay dividends or anything else.  It is only loosely defined as a stock and not publicly traded on the NYSE or anything.  Haemish is absolutely right that's a vanity thing only.

This is right under the "I WANT TO PURCHASE STOCK IN GREEN BAY PACKERS, INC"
Quote
COMMON STOCK DOES NOT CONSTITUTE AN INVESTMENT IN “STOCK” IN THE COMMON SENSE OF THE TERM.

PURCHASERS SHOULD NOT PURCHASE COMMON STOCK WITH THE PURPOSE OF MAKING A PROFIT.

Then also this in the FAQ

Wow... and I thought the paying to name a star bullshit was a rip off.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 08, 2011, 08:46:17 AM
It's basically a donation to the team so they can improve the stadium, and thus future team revenues. It's not really stock. The only reason besides being a Packers' fan that I would be ok with such a thing is the fact that the Packers are a team owned by the community, not by one giant rich asshole. Jerry Jones can build his own goddamn epeen stadium with his own goddamn money. The Packers are almost a commune-type of deal and I dig that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 08, 2011, 10:43:44 AM
It's a donation you get no benefit from.

This is the dumbest offering I've ever heard of from a financial standpoint in recent years.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 08, 2011, 10:54:54 AM
They get a nice certificate to hang on the wall and the ability to say "hey, I own part of the Packers".  You're not a Packers fan, so it's difficult to understand.  I can't say that I really understand it, either, but it probably has a little to do with the fact that it isn't a privately owned team.

Oh, and.......

(http://cache.gawkerassets.com/assets/images/11/2011/12/a035f7dd4b52b06989310e29334ca5b2.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 08, 2011, 11:43:15 AM
They get a nice certificate to hang on the wall and the ability to say "hey, I own part of the Packers".  You're not a Packers fan, so it's difficult to understand.  I can't say that I really understand it, either, but it probably has a little to do with the fact that it isn't a privately owned team.

But you don't own anything. You own a piece of paper that grants you a vote. At the end of the day, if they sold the franchise all your money gets donated to charity and you get nothing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 08, 2011, 12:12:38 PM
But you don't own anything. You own a piece of paper that grants you a vote. At the end of the day, if they sold the franchise all your money gets donated to charity and you get nothing.

You're completely missing the point, which is that the people that would buy these things care fuck all for your rational, CPA way of thinking about this.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 08, 2011, 12:18:08 PM
But you don't own anything. You own a piece of paper that grants you a vote. At the end of the day, if they sold the franchise all your money gets donated to charity and you get nothing.

You're completely missing the point, which is that the people that would buy these things care fuck all for your rational, CPA way of thinking about this.

 :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 08, 2011, 12:20:18 PM
They get a nice certificate to hang on the wall and the ability to say "hey, I own part of the Packers".  You're not a Packers fan, so it's difficult to understand.  I can't say that I really understand it, either, but it probably has a little to do with the fact that it isn't a privately owned team.

But you don't own anything. You own a piece of paper that grants you a vote. At the end of the day, if they sold the franchise all your money gets donated to charity and you get nothing.

Yes, you get fuckall. You spend $250 on a piece of paper you can frame on the wall. If you are a Packer fan, it's still pretty cool - like owning a seat from old Comiskey Park if you are a White Sox fan, or one of Tom Landry's hats, or an autograph from Roger Staubach. It's a worthless vanity product. Like a limited edition statue or something.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 08, 2011, 12:21:21 PM
Except the limited edition statue or seat appreciates in value.

YOU'RE NOT EVEN ALLOWED TO SELL THE FUCKING PIECE OF PAPER.

EDIT: I know, I know. I understand that it's about the vanity, but this kind of shit breaks my fucking brain when people bitch about not having enough money for their 401k, but they have Packers stock hanging on the wall.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 08, 2011, 12:22:01 PM
/shrug


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Evildrider on December 08, 2011, 12:22:37 PM
Sounds like you got fudge Packered for 250 bucks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on December 08, 2011, 07:33:15 PM
Except the limited edition statue or seat appreciates in value.

YOU'RE NOT EVEN ALLOWED TO SELL THE FUCKING PIECE OF PAPER.

EDIT: I know, I know. I understand that it's about the vanity, but this kind of shit breaks my fucking brain when people bitch about not having enough money for their 401k, but they have Packers stock hanging on the wall.

Actually, you can sell your shares. You just cannot sell them for more than the face value.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 08, 2011, 07:38:19 PM
Quote
Shares of stock cannot be resold, except back to the team
for a fraction of the original price. Limited transfer of shares
(i.e., to heirs and relatives) is permissible.

Whoopdedoo. I can sell them back to the team for a loss. Again, this is really really REALLY stupid. Donate your money to charity. At least you get a tax writeoff.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on December 08, 2011, 07:47:18 PM
It is not for you, we get it.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on December 08, 2011, 07:49:58 PM
Except the limited edition statue or seat appreciates in value.

YOU'RE NOT EVEN ALLOWED TO SELL THE FUCKING PIECE OF PAPER.

EDIT: I know, I know. I understand that it's about the vanity, but this kind of shit breaks my fucking brain when people bitch about not having enough money for their 401k, but they have Packers stock hanging on the wall.

I felt that way until I realized that every person increasing their personal wealth was fucking me over by that same amount.  It's the old "if everyone has a million dollars" question.  Since then I'm all for folks spending vs. saving.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 08, 2011, 07:53:45 PM
It is not for you, we get it.

A fool and his money, buyer beware, etc.

In other news, Pittsburgh is playing like hell on TNF.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on December 09, 2011, 05:16:16 AM
It is not for you, we get it.

A fool and his money, buyer beware, etc.

In other news, Pittsburgh is playing like hell on TNF.

I have no idea how the hell Big Jen came back and played on that fucking ankle. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on December 11, 2011, 09:43:22 AM
My picks for today:

Bal over Indy
Atl over Carolina-Atl needs a win and they know the Panthers well.
Houston over Cincy-Houston's a well-coached team and I think Cincy is fading in the stretch.
Detroit over Minnesota-I think, hope and pray the Lions have gotten their act together and stop being fools. No Adrian Peterson also.
TB over Jags-TB's QB is back, that's all I got, don't follow these teams much.
Fins over Philly-The Fins are playing so well right now and I don't have any confidence in the Eagles.
Jets over KC-Both teams are mediocre at best, but the Jets defense is good.

Titans over NO-Upset special!  Saints having to play outside and the Titans have to win to stay in the wild card spot.  I look for the  Titans to try to run Chris Johnson 30 times and control the ball.

NE over Washington
SF over Arizona
Denver over Chicago-The Bears offense is mighty suspect and the Broncos are led by a higher power.  :oh_i_see:
GB over Oakland
Bolts over Buffalo-Norv Turner is horrible, but SD needs a win and play well in December.
Dallas over NY-Hard to pick, both teams are inconsistent.  I do think Dallas wants it more.





Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: stu on December 11, 2011, 02:29:29 PM

Fins over Philly-The Fins are playing so well right now and I don't have any confidence in the Eagles.


Mang, today was the first time in a couple months that I chose Miami to win in the Pick 'Em league. Doh, figures.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on December 11, 2011, 03:54:24 PM
Oh hey, it's another last minute flurry of scoring to push the game into overtime, including a last second 59 yard field goal!  :awesome_for_real:

I wonder what the record is for overtime games played in a season by one team?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 11, 2011, 04:14:39 PM
Tebow! TEBOW! TEBOW!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Evildrider on December 11, 2011, 04:43:39 PM
Tebow! TEBOW! TEBOW!

That was an amazing last 3 minutes.  lol.  I don't even watch football much anymore, but I'm gettin Tebow fever.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Abagadro on December 11, 2011, 04:52:08 PM
My grandma could throw check downs against that 4th quarter defense which was one of the softest prevents I've ever seen.  Marion Barber single-handedly lost that game, Tebow didn't win it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 11, 2011, 04:57:30 PM
My grandma could throw check downs against that 4th quarter defense which was one of the softest prevents I've ever seen.  Marion Barber single-handedly lost that game, Tebow didn't win it.

 :raspberry:

Absolutely the Bears lost it. Still, the Defense for the Broncos is absolutely awesome.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 11, 2011, 05:39:05 PM
The Tebow thing is getting ridiculous.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on December 11, 2011, 05:39:51 PM
Someone put Barber on suicide watch.


The Tebow thing is fucking glorious, I can't wait till he wins the Superbowl in the 4th with no time on the clock with a drop kick.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on December 11, 2011, 06:45:27 PM
WTF San Fran?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 11, 2011, 07:36:52 PM
The Tebow thing is getting ridiculous.

If by ridiculous you mean mind meltingly awesome!  :drill: :drill: :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 11, 2011, 08:01:53 PM
WTF San Fran?

Cardinals have been good lately and they took the Niners right out of their game plan. 37 pass attempts for Smith vs. 10 rushing attempts for Gore is not good 49ers math.

Also the officials fucked them out of a TD again.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Abagadro on December 11, 2011, 08:36:46 PM
And their receivers seem to have forgotten how to catch a pass.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on December 11, 2011, 08:42:47 PM
 :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on December 11, 2011, 08:43:44 PM
 :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 11, 2011, 08:44:03 PM
I want to throttle Rob Ryan and his shitty Defensive strategy.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on December 11, 2011, 08:46:19 PM
 :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill: :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on December 11, 2011, 08:47:01 PM
I want to throttle Rob Ryan and his shitty Defensive strategy.

I think his strategy was ok, it's the execution that was shitty.  That and Eli handled pressure better than usual.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 11, 2011, 08:47:23 PM
Jason Pierre Paul is a freaking beast. Good lord.

Now it comes down to a game in NY. God, this is going to be a terrible divisional finish.  :ye_gods: :grin: :drill: :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on December 11, 2011, 08:52:44 PM
I want to throttle Rob Ryan and his shitty Defensive strategy.

I think his strategy was ok, it's the execution that was shitty.  That and Eli handled pressure better than usual.

Really, it was my magical hexing powers. You can ask Fordel, he saw me doing it in IRC.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on December 11, 2011, 09:00:53 PM
It's true, her hate was tangible! She mailed a solid brick of hate to Dallas.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on December 11, 2011, 09:02:10 PM
And they feasted upon it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on December 11, 2011, 09:07:39 PM
Jason Pierre Paul is a freaking beast. Good lord.

Just imagine when he really gets settled into the game.  He didn't even start playing football until his senior year of high school and he only had one year of I-A football.  He was definitely a bright spot for South Florida that year. The guy's athleticism is way off the charts.  6' 5" and 270 and he can do 20+ backflips in a row in full pads.  How many other defensive linemen can do that?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 11, 2011, 09:13:02 PM
Might want to gameplan better for that guy when we get to New York, Jason. Hmmm?  :grin:

Honestly, I don't think either defense is going to like the tape on this game. There were some hilarious fuckups in the secondary on both sides on multiple occasions.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Zetleft on December 12, 2011, 12:48:39 AM
But we still lost that game.  Horrible.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ozzu on December 12, 2011, 04:38:26 AM
This Cowboys season has just been one kick in the balls after another.  :heartbreak:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: DLRiley on December 12, 2011, 06:33:43 AM
TeBOW!!!!!  :drill:



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 12, 2011, 06:56:40 AM
But we still lost that game.  Horrible.

Giants are 3-0 at Jerryworld. I blame the new digs.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on December 12, 2011, 07:14:30 AM
Someone put Barber on suicide watch.


The Tebow thing is fucking glorious, I can't wait till he wins the Superbowl in the 4th with no time on the clock with a drop kick.  :why_so_serious:

I just saw a piece on Bloomberg TV about how CBS and Fox are now arguing about who gets to televise games in which the Broncos plays AFC teams.  Hilarious.

That said, I made an effort to tune in to the 2H (figuring the 1H didn't matter) and I was rewarded with a great ending.  Yes, Barber deserves to be jeered, but Chicago's 1H effort was pathetic.  Tebow was 0-11 on passing, for God's sake!  :awesome_for_real:  That fumble was all Denver, though.  Great strip.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on December 12, 2011, 08:23:07 AM
My grandma could throw check downs against that 4th quarter defense which was one of the softest prevents I've ever seen.  Marion Barber single-handedly lost that game, Tebow didn't win it.

Marion Barber lost it TWICE. TWICE. That takes TALENT.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on December 12, 2011, 08:48:24 AM

I just saw a piece on Bloomberg TV about how CBS and Fox are now arguing about who gets to televise games in which the Broncos plays AFC teams.  Hilarious.


Why?  It must be hell to sell advertising for Bronco games since there's no reason to bother watching them until the last 5 minutes or so.   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on December 12, 2011, 08:54:05 AM
So, who had Todd Haley as the first to go?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on December 12, 2011, 09:09:25 AM
They would have lost because the correct answer was Jack Del Rio.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on December 12, 2011, 09:16:18 AM
Why?  It must be hell to sell advertising for Bronco games since there's no reason to bother watching them until the last 5 minutes or so.   :why_so_serious:
That reminds me of the last two weeks before this one where at the last 3 minutes of the game I was watching and interested in they say "let's switch over to a more competitive game" and switched it to the Broncos.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on December 12, 2011, 09:19:05 AM
They would have lost because the correct answer was Jack Del Rio.

Damn it, how did I forget that mess.  Sheesh.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 12, 2011, 09:37:26 AM
Oh what a day.

The Packers made it look ridiculously easy against the Raiders, who are probably done. I think the Pack's defense got pissed off that people were talking bad about them and decided to take it out on Carson Palmer. Losing Jennings short term won't hurt them too bad as that receiving corps is DEEP - but I worry if he's out long term. 31-0 I'm not sure why he was in there to be hurt, but it happens.

Denver - goddamnit they just keep winning. However, I will point out that the teams they've beaten in this manner REALLY SUCK. The best win they had was against the Jets when the Jets were playing like shit. That defense is playing well, but we'll see how they handle Brady. The best QB's they've faced in this stretch have been Stafford, Rivers (when he was playing AWFUL) and everyone else is either a scrub, an also ran or a replacement. Still, watching the Bears season disintegrate is quite satisfying. Thinking of them playing with a disgruntled Forte on a cheap out franchise tagged contract next year makes me even happier. I think Barber's performance in OT proves that they need to pay Forte right fucking now.

Oh the NFC East. The Goddamn EAGLES are still in mathematical contention. I think Dallas misses the playoffs this year. Eli is playing out of his mind and if that team didn't have so many injuries, it might actually be dangerous. Their defense is really weak though - beyond that front 4, their linebackers are suspect (injuries don't help) and their secondary is at times easily confused. The number of blown coverage plays on both teams last night was insane. At least Romo didn't self-destruct tonight. If the Giants get some healthy bodies back for the playoffs, they could be one of those sleeper teams. Or they could just as easily self-destruct the last 3 games - this is the Giants after all. Dallas on the other hand looks mentally fragile and hey, no more Demarco Murray. Gone for the season. Felix Jones and his glass shoulders it is! Guess even Marion Barber looks good about now. Good thing you didn't release Tashard Choice... oh.

The Jets beat the shit out of KC and everyone else in the AFC lost, so GODDAMNIT the Jets are still in it. FUCK. I want them to lose. Oh yeah, look, Todd Haley just got shitcanned for his shitty Chiefs team. I guess it's a surprise he lasted longer than Sparano or any of the other bubble coaches. And hey, guess what, Romeo Crennel is probably taking over. YEAH!

If New Orleans can somehow secure the #2 seed, they have a chance to go the Super Bowl. If they have to go to Green Bay, forget about it. I'd give them even odds on a trip to San Fran. Of the 4 teams who might have a realistic chance at the last 3 spots (Detroit, NY Giants, Dallas and Atlanta), the only one that really scares me is the Giants.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 12, 2011, 11:17:53 AM
Everyone fired up for the powerhouse matchup tonight?

Anyone?

Guys?

Sjofn?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 12, 2011, 11:29:25 AM
It will decide my playoff fate!

On my side, Marshawn Lynch and 15 points, on his side Brandon Lloyd and the Seattle defense!

Note that in our league you get a point per reception so that is closer than it sounds.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on December 12, 2011, 11:40:27 AM
Re: Dallas, I am floored that a NFL team would plan to enter the playoff race with only 2 viable RBs. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 12, 2011, 11:49:16 AM
Re: Dallas, I am floored that a NFL team would plan to enter the playoff race with only 2 viable RBs. 

It's apparently a throwing league now.

Is it too late for Dallas to trade Romo for Tebow straight up?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 12, 2011, 11:52:11 AM
It will decide my playoff fate!

On my side, Marshawn Lynch and 15 points, on his side Brandon Lloyd and the Seattle defense!

Note that in our league you get a point per reception so that is closer than it sounds.

I am down 27 with Baldwin and Jackson to go. I am dead.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on December 12, 2011, 11:58:57 AM
Everyone fired up for the powerhouse matchup tonight?

Anyone?

Guys?

Sjofn?

I don't think I even get ESPN 8 "The Ocho."


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on December 12, 2011, 12:08:07 PM
It will decide my playoff fate!

On my side, Marshawn Lynch and 15 points, on his side Brandon Lloyd and the Seattle defense!

Note that in our league you get a point per reception so that is closer than it sounds.

My league scores .5 for receptions.  My opponent has Brandon Lloyd playing tonight, but I'm not worried since I got 171 points this week and she'd have to get 95 points from him to catch me.  :-o

I just realized that all four of the ladies in my league made the playoffs this year, which is pretty good since it's 14 teams and only 6 playoff spots.  :drillf:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: EWSpider on December 12, 2011, 12:21:07 PM
Bwahahaha!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNC8xRo9vXY

 :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on December 12, 2011, 01:16:18 PM
It will decide my playoff fate!

On my side, Marshawn Lynch and 15 points, on his side Brandon Lloyd and the Seattle defense!

Note that in our league you get a point per reception so that is closer than it sounds.

My league scores .5 for receptions.  My opponent has Brandon Lloyd playing tonight, but I'm not worried since I got 171 points this week and she'd have to get 95 points from him to catch me.  :-o

I just realized that all four of the ladies in my league made the playoffs this year, which is pretty good since it's 14 teams and only 6 playoff spots.  :drillf:

I believe I secured first place (for the "regular season") in our tiny league. I'm on a nine game winning streak! So I am sure to completely blow the first playoff.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on December 12, 2011, 01:21:05 PM
I thought NFL coaches were erring on the side of being overly cautious on the whole concussion incidents.

But not according to Colt McCoy's father (http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2011/12/colt_mccoys_father_says_mccoy.html):

Quote
BEREA -- Browns quarterback Colt McCoy's father, Brad, said today that Colt doesn't remember anything after taking a vicious helmet to helmet hit from Steelers linebacker James Harrison and that he never should've gone back in the game.

Brad McCoy, a lifelong high school football coach who coached Colt all through junior high and high school, said McCoy doesn't remember throwing the interception in the end zone three plays after he jogged back onto the field after missing two plays following the hit. The pick essentially cost the Browns the game and they lost 14-3.

"I talked to Colt this morning and he said 'dad, I don't know what happened," Brad McCoy said.

 "He never should've gone back in the game. He was basically out (cold) after the hit. You could tell by the ridigity of his body as he was laying there. There were a lot of easy symptoms that should've told them he had a concussion. He was nauseated and he didn't know who he was. From what I could see, they didn't test him for a concussion on the sidelines. They looked at his (left) hand.''


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on December 12, 2011, 01:39:57 PM
I thought NFL coaches were erring on the side of being overly cautious on the whole concussion incidents.

But not according to Colt McCoy's father (http://www.cleveland.com/browns/index.ssf/2011/12/colt_mccoys_father_says_mccoy.html):

Quote
BEREA -- Browns quarterback Colt McCoy's father, Brad, said today that Colt doesn't remember anything after taking a vicious helmet to helmet hit from Steelers linebacker James Harrison and that he never should've gone back in the game.

Brad McCoy, a lifelong high school football coach who coached Colt all through junior high and high school, said McCoy doesn't remember throwing the interception in the end zone three plays after he jogged back onto the field after missing two plays following the hit. The pick essentially cost the Browns the game and they lost 14-3.

"I talked to Colt this morning and he said 'dad, I don't know what happened," Brad McCoy said.

 "He never should've gone back in the game. He was basically out (cold) after the hit. You could tell by the ridigity of his body as he was laying there. There were a lot of easy symptoms that should've told them he had a concussion. He was nauseated and he didn't know who he was. From what I could see, they didn't test him for a concussion on the sidelines. They looked at his (left) hand.''

This happened last Friday - I recall reading it on the PDOnline. He is probably angling to get his kid outta Cleveland. I can tell you, it will not be the concussions that kill his career, it's the city. I feel bad for kids that get drafted to my curse of a team. It is really a sports death sentence. If you can escape it, take the chance - even if you have to sign with Satan.

Oh and I agree with his dad. Watching that play... fuck that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on December 12, 2011, 01:42:22 PM
Bye bye, Sparano.  Time to sleep with the fishes.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on December 12, 2011, 03:00:13 PM
Kind of a shame.  He had the Fish fighting hard without any playmakers other than Reggie Bush.  Or do they have more?  I know little. 

This Tebow stuff is delicious.  Delicious!  All the fucking 'experts' on TV are looking like fools.  Oh and Marion Barber?  One question, how do you not drown when you look up at rain?  Lastly, let's not forget Prater was the one who actually made the points.  Good gut check there to kick a 51 yarder in OT.

Lions might stagger into the playoffs, but they are weaksauce.  I say this as a somewhat proud fan of the Motor City Kitties.  You don't let a 3rd string QB run over your ass like that.  The Lions were given a gift yesterday with a no-call over a 2-11 team.  Bad defense and, sorry to say, weak coaching. 





Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 12, 2011, 03:04:51 PM
Kind of a shame.  He had the Fish fighting hard without any playmakers other than Reggie Bush.  Or do they have more?  I know little.

They do have Brandon Marshall at wideout, but when Matt Moore is the guy throwing to you and there's no one else on the field, good defenses can shut him down.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on December 12, 2011, 03:22:49 PM
Kind of a shame.  He had the Fish fighting hard without any playmakers other than Reggie Bush.  Or do they have more?  I know little.

They do have Brandon Marshall at wideout, but when Matt Moore is the guy throwing to you and there's no one else on the field, good defenses can shut him down.

Brandon Marshall is great when he's not suffering from chronic butterfingers, and Moore has actually been relatively good the past 6 games or so.  If Sparano had his players fighting hard for the first 7 games, he might still have a job.  The 'fins were just awful at the beginning of the year though, and nearly all the blame rests at the feet of the coaching staff.

Lions might stagger into the playoffs, but they are weaksauce.  I say this as a somewhat proud fan of the Motor City Kitties.  You don't let a 3rd string QB run over your ass like that.  The Lions were given a gift yesterday with a no-call over a 2-11 team.  Bad defense and, sorry to say, weak coaching. 

That bad defense got me 27 points this week though, so no complaints here!  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 12, 2011, 03:25:04 PM
There's a very real shot that both Wild Cards have better records than the NFC East Champion this year.

Our division blows.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on December 12, 2011, 03:27:29 PM
There's a very real shot that both Wild Cards have better records than the NFC East Champion this year.

Our division blows.

Could be worse. Could be tha AFC West!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 12, 2011, 08:34:21 PM
Beast Mode needs to be sponsored by Skittles.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 12, 2011, 08:46:57 PM
That last TD put me into the playoffs, roll on you Bears!  :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on December 14, 2011, 01:29:54 PM
Brandon Marshall is great when he's not suffering from chronic butterfingers...

... and not complaining and not giving up on plays and not being arrested.  (As a Broncos fan, I'm not really missing him.)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 14, 2011, 01:43:15 PM
Or stabbed by his equally crazy wife.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on December 16, 2011, 04:52:20 AM
Oh, NFL, you just keep on giving.

Sam Hurd arrested while operating and trying to expand a major drug ring in Chicago.  (Unless you consider 1000# of pot/ week not major...) But he hired the guy that got Snoop off of a murder rap so it could all go away.

Except for that list of NFL players that were Hurd's clients the DEA now has...

http://www.cnn.com/2011/12/15/justice/nfl-player-arrest/?hpt=hp_t2


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 16, 2011, 08:04:52 AM
Can you actually call a guy that plays wideout for the Bears a wide receiver? Of course, I'm sure after a few years in the pokey, he will be.  :rimshot:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2011, 08:33:14 AM
Proving once again that if you have ever played for the Cowboys at any point in history, your likelihood to be busted for drug trafficking charges goes up ten-fold.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 16, 2011, 08:44:38 AM
I thought Michael Irvin handed new players a bag of blow as they entered training camp every year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 16, 2011, 08:51:03 AM
I thought Michael Irvin handed new players a bag of blow as they entered training camp every year.

And a hot Rolex, and a hot hooker.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 16, 2011, 08:56:18 AM
(http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/s320x320/388483_10150445745998785_522448784_8693538_1497509619_n.jpg)

Sums it up nicely.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 16, 2011, 08:57:14 AM
 :roffle: :roffle: :roffle: :roffle: :roffle: :roffle: :roffle: :roffle:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on December 16, 2011, 10:08:30 AM
There are not words to describe the level of awesome in that image.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on December 17, 2011, 02:56:03 PM
Why the hell can't the home team in a cross conference game be the side whose network covers the game? I won't be able to watch the packers at chefs because it is being aired on fox and is the same time as the bears and the seachickens.

:mob:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on December 18, 2011, 12:56:48 PM
So who had Indy winning their first game and Green Bay losing their first game on the same day?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 18, 2011, 01:06:02 PM
Motherfucker.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on December 18, 2011, 01:09:01 PM
On the bright side the starters will be well-rested for the playoffs :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on December 18, 2011, 02:04:28 PM
(http://manningface.s3.amazonaws.com/images/1322547929_eli.jpg)

OH YOU


Seriously, Giants, I just don't understand you.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on December 18, 2011, 02:31:33 PM
I'm not watching it, but it looks like Denver/NE is competitive....  and TEBOW hasn't even hit his 4th Quarter power up yet.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 18, 2011, 02:47:11 PM
The Giants are silly.

Watch the Cowboys lose to the freaking Eagles and have the final game in NY decide the division.

JUST YOU WATCH!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on December 18, 2011, 04:23:56 PM
The Giants are silly.

Watch the Cowboys lose to the freaking Eagles and have the final game in NY decide the division.

JUST YOU WATCH!

At least Aikman talked about how no one expected anything of the Giants this year, and that was before injuries.  The Eagles are dysfunctional, but they have the pure talent to be amazing.

Come on, though....  Cowboys/Giants for the division at the end of the season?  That would be an amazing game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on December 18, 2011, 04:47:48 PM
And that's why they call him Megatron.  Not looking forward to facing him next week in my league in the championship game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on December 18, 2011, 04:59:17 PM
The Giants are silly.

Watch the Cowboys lose to the freaking Eagles and have the final game in NY decide the division.

JUST YOU WATCH!

If the Cowboys lose to the Eagles, then the Eagles v Redskins will decide the division!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on December 18, 2011, 05:36:52 PM
Man, the Lions love making it interesting!  They have a two game lead for the wild card?  Crazy.

But the Chiefs beat the Pack!  Is KC a good team that just quit playing for their now fired coach or was this NFL parity at work?
I really thought GB would win out.  They are scary good.

I give up on the NFC East, it's a mad house, a mad house!

Oh and Titans.  You lost to Indy.  Indy.  I am done watching your sorry asses this year.  You know you had to win out to get in the playoffs and you laid down to the flippin' Colts.  Pathetic.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on December 18, 2011, 05:55:39 PM
But the Chiefs beat the Pack!  Is KC a good team that just quit playing for their now fired coach or was this NFL parity at work?
I really thought GB would win out.  They are scary good.

Not starting Tyler Palko helped a bit. That guy had a arm that's too weak for the arena league.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on December 18, 2011, 06:45:14 PM
God damn it.   Someone tell Phillip Rivers to go back to fucking up and stop trying to save Norv Turner and squeak into the playoffs.    :mob:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on December 19, 2011, 08:05:03 AM
The Giants are silly.

Watch the Cowboys lose to the freaking Eagles and have the final game in NY decide the division.

JUST YOU WATCH!

If the giants win next week that last game will decide the division regardless.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 19, 2011, 08:11:48 AM
Welp, it did have to happen sooner or later. The Packers lost to the goddamn Chiefs, with Kyle Orton at QB no less. Better it happens now than in January. I don't think they can lose home field advantage through the playoffs (they hold the tiebreaker over the Saints, not sure about the 49ers and both teams are already on 3 losses). They need to get Starks back, as Grant won't be able to handle the running against the Bears alone next week. Not that they'll need it. With Caleb Hainie at QB, I don't expect the Bears to win another game. He's just that bad. I look forward to the Bears organization totally falling apart next year as Forte holds out because they keep dicking him on a contract and Mike Martz bolts to take the Chargers job where he can cut Philip Rivers' career short without ever winning a Super Bowl.

We got to see Tebow and the Broncos for what they are. They can beat bad teams with a stifling defense, but they can't stand up to teams with good offenses. Both New England and Detroit put 40+ up on them. Good on the Broncos for making it competitive for a half, though that second quarter was just brutally bad. The fumbles killed them. You cannot give Brady so many short fields in such a small span of time. If Denver makes the playoffs over the Raiders, they might be able to beat the Bengals or the Jets (one of those will be the #6 seed) but if Pittsburgh is #5 seed, they will lose HARD. They MIGHT be able to beat the Ravens because as we saw again last night, the Ravens SUCK MIGHTY COCK on the road. Flacco turns into Trent Dilfer on the road. He was just bad last night, his accuracy was terrible and San Diego did enough to slow Ray Rice so that they couldn't ride him to the victory. Plus, Rivers just put on a clinic against a good defense. It's too bad their defense is weak as hell and their running game is so easy to shut down.

The Jets, Giants, Bengals and Broncos are all set for disappointment. The Jets are just terrible at coming from behind. They should have been able to run all over the Eagles defense, but they can't. I don't know what the hell is wrong with their running game but damn. The Giants fell back down to earth against a bad Skins team. Blown coverages, and 3 picks from Eli. It just confirms to me that no one wants to win the NFC East.

Tonight's game should be a good one. A 49ers team that's cooling off against a Steelers team with a hobbled Rapist at QB. I expect less than 20 points total.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on December 19, 2011, 09:18:01 AM
Really looking forward to tonight's game, haven't seen many Niners games this season.  I agree with your assessment of the Broncos. This is not the Broncos year, but they need to keep and pay Tebow, he's earned his stripes. 

The Bears treatment of Matt Forte is shameful.  He should rake them over the coals on a new contract.

 I'm still not sold on the Lions defense.  They're soft and penalty-prone.  But they have an awesome offense and are damn fun to watch and are clutch players.  Don't get me wrong, I'm thrilled the Lions might make the playoffs but I'm expecting one and done.  They're just one dimensional.   


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on December 19, 2011, 09:48:26 AM
The Bengals as a disappointment are just par for the course.   At least the city has managed to finally catch-on to that and isn't supporting Brown like they had for the last 20 years.   There's been ONE televised home game this year and that was only because the local Steelers fans came out and bought up all the rest of the tickets.   Glorious.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 19, 2011, 09:51:33 AM
I don't know that Tebow is a long-term solution. I think the wins he's gotten have been as much about the defense as they have been about him. He's certainly earned the right to compete for the starting job next year with whoever they draft. But they damn well better draft someone because nobody should be sold on Tebow yet.

The Lions defense is scary because the front 4 can get a pass rush without ever having to blitz, which makes their very suspect corners better than they really are. But yeah, their penalties are probably going to kill them in the playoffs, that and the complete lack of a running game.

And I forgot to laugh at the Titans. HAH HAH!  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on December 19, 2011, 10:14:10 AM
Flacco turns into Trent Dilfer on the road.

Yeah, no team could ever win the Super Bowl with Dilfer as QB.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on December 19, 2011, 10:18:44 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/LuCf1.jpg) (http://imgur.com/LuCf1)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on December 19, 2011, 05:22:11 PM
So I flip over to ESPN to watch some of the game (to see if Gore can pull of 40 points  :awesome_for_real: ) and Candlestick just lost power.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on December 19, 2011, 05:35:07 PM
:facepalm: A new stadium cannot come soon enough.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 19, 2011, 05:37:50 PM
It is bad enough trying to get out of that place with the lights on, I am pretty sure that people trying to leave the stadium in the dark will actually just end up traveling backwards in time.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on December 19, 2011, 05:50:10 PM
I don't know that Tebow is a long-term solution. I think the wins he's gotten have been as much about the defense as they have been about him. He's certainly earned the right to compete for the starting job next year with whoever they draft. But they damn well better draft someone because nobody should be sold on Tebow yet.

The Lions defense is scary because the front 4 can get a pass rush without ever having to blitz, which makes their very suspect corners better than they really are. But yeah, their penalties are probably going to kill them in the playoffs, that and the complete lack of a running game.

And I forgot to laugh at the Titans. HAH HAH!  :grin:

Tebow had one great drive while trying to play catchup.  I think he's got potential if the stories about his work ethic are true, considering he's a rookie who has only had 8(?) starts and little training camp.  Either way, you can't ignore the fact that Tebow has changed Denver from a laughing stock to a team where the networks were fighting over who got to broadcast the NE/Denver game.  Merchandise alone should have the suits smiling.

Collingsworth was ribbing Simms pretty good about stealing the game from him on Inside the NFL.  Which I love.

Besides, in the salary cap era, Tebow will never be a high price tag QB which frees up money to spend on the other positions. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on December 19, 2011, 06:37:22 PM
So the powers out and a guy runs across the field.  Rothlesberger yells out "Where's James Harrison when you need him?"

Stay classy Rothlesberger!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on December 20, 2011, 06:16:08 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KR8tUUJPTTw

This will never get old. James Harrison needs to take notes.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 20, 2011, 06:21:40 AM
Note that Brady springs back immediately and manages to hold onto the football.  That guy is a badass. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 20, 2011, 06:53:21 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KR8tUUJPTTw

This will never get old. James Harrison needs to take notes.

I loved everything about that hit. It was hard, it was legal, and Brady wasn't crippled or rolling around on the ground. All around football win.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 20, 2011, 07:22:00 AM
Yeah, that was a solid hit. Nobody bitched and complained, no fines were coming and it made the entire audience wince with delight.

I really like what San Fran is doing on offense these days. Short, 3-step drops and get the ball the fuck out of there. Don't give Alex Smith time to think himself into a sack or an INT. They probably should go downfield a little more, but it's really clicking for that team. They've got talent at wideout and tight end, so giving Smith the safety of a good running game and quick releases helps explain why he's only thrown 5 picks with 16 TD's this year. He won't be an MVP candidate but he isn't losing them games. And my God that defense is stifling. Granted, they were playing against a hobbled Rapist, but Aldon Smith is a fucking beast at end. He got at least two sacks and more QB pressures on that inside stunt twist move where he just came free up the middle. I think more than New Orleans, I don't want to have to play San Fran at home in the playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on December 20, 2011, 08:14:21 AM
Tebow is looking decidedly better. Those first few possessions were impressive. His throwing motion still takes WAY too long, however. But his release is getting better, less wobbly balls, better management. I could see him being much more effective given an entire off-season to work with the coaching staff. With that being said, I would like to see us draft someone... However, I'm not sure who we would. Griffin and Luck will long be gone before we draft at this rate, and we have a lot of needs to fill, so I would rather not see the Broncos trade away all their draft picks to move up. Given Fox's history, I doubt that will happen.

Also.. this? This is fucking amazing. I love you, internet.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on December 20, 2011, 09:58:27 AM
With that being said, I would like to see us draft someone... However, I'm not sure who we would. Griffin and Luck will long be gone before we draft at this rate, and we have a lot of needs to fill, so I would rather not see the Broncos trade away all their draft picks to move up.

This is a year where there are a lot of quarterbacks available. A guy like Weeden from ok state will probably not going to be gone before late first round if not second round.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 20, 2011, 10:46:15 AM
Yeah there are a ton of QBs. Kellen Moore will probably not go super early either.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 20, 2011, 10:52:17 AM
Not really a lot of great quarterback prospects though.  Luck and Barkley are the obvious best two choices, and then you have Griffin III and Landry Jones.  I think Jones has what it takes to be an NFL quarterback, not so sure about Griffin.  After that there isn't much to choose from.  Nick Foles?  I don't think so.  Wheedon?  Too old.  One thing to remember about Kellen Moore is that he's 5'11" with high heels on.  He won't be drafted early simply because of that. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 20, 2011, 10:53:48 AM
I think he could be Brees-esque, but we'll see.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on December 20, 2011, 11:00:59 AM
Not really a lot of great quarterback prospects though.  Luck and Barkley are the obvious best two choices, and then you have Griffin III and Landry Jones.  I think Jones has what it takes to be an NFL quarterback, not so sure about Griffin.  After that there isn't much to choose from.  Nick Foles?  I don't think so.  Wheedon?  Too old.  One thing to remember about Kellen Moore is that he's 5'11" with high heels on.  He won't be drafted early simply because of that. 

Weeden is better than Jones and I think he actually has the best chance of fitting into a pro system for everyone except Luck. He is 28 though so that will scare a lot of teams.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 20, 2011, 11:04:04 AM
Wheedon is awesome, but since the peak year of production for most athletes is 27 he won't be drafted at anything higher than the third or fourth round unless someone really, really needs a QB.  There's just too much financial risk involved with Wheedon. 

I'm intrigued by Moore.  He's been a winner, for sure, but there are a lot more prototypical pro style QBs that will be taken ahead of him just because of his stature. He would have to be on the right team to make an impact.  It would be interesting to see what he could do on a decent team like the Ravens or Denver.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on December 20, 2011, 11:08:12 AM
Wondering which one is going to be the sacrificial lamb that goes to the Browns... I actually started feeling bad for anyone drafted by Cleveland on day 1. Knowing they are going to spend the next 3-5 years struggling to find another team to play on. I can just imagine the thoughts of some kid when he hears "And with the # pick of the (year) draft, the Cleveland Browns select <doomed player name> from (school)" - probably 'well fuck it... there goes my formative years.'  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 21, 2011, 12:43:20 PM
Slate takes a look at the NFL's widest necks (http://www.slate.com/slideshows/sports/the-nfls-widest-necks.html). 

There's no way that most of these guys aren't on some form of steroid or other enhancement.  It's just unnatural to have your neck be bigger than your head. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on December 21, 2011, 12:47:52 PM
Maybe the probability in the general human population is very low but in the limited sample that is the NFL it isn't crazy.  Muscles grow when you use them.  These guys are in positions that demand strong neck and upper back muscles to minimize injury. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 21, 2011, 12:50:48 PM
Roids, dammit.  Has to be. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on December 23, 2011, 04:25:37 AM
So the Colts are no longer the runaway favorite in the Andrew Luck sweepstakes.  Tied with the Rams and Minnesota.  There is no way they deserve to strike QB gold a second time in a row, so I am really, REALLY hoping they don't get the #1 pick.  Fuck the Colts.  I like Peyton Manning a lot, but I am otherwise very tired of this whole organization.  They deserve a few bad years.  Let Minnesota get him.  I'd like that, for some reason.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on December 23, 2011, 06:17:51 AM
Not sure how the tie breakers work but I would say right now it's the Rams who are now the front runners for the number one pick overall. They play the Steelers and Niners. The Vikings play the Redskins and Bears, and the Colts play the Jaguars.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 23, 2011, 02:27:08 PM
Would the Vikings pick Luck with Ponder on the roster? He may not be as highly rated as Luck, but Ponder has looked decent on a very very bad team with no wideouts worth mentioning (Harvin has been in and out of the lineup and is very injury prone).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on December 23, 2011, 04:03:59 PM
Would the Vikings pick Luck with Ponder on the roster? He may not be as highly rated as Luck, but Ponder has looked decent on a very very bad team with no wideouts worth mentioning (Harvin has been in and out of the lineup and is very injury prone).

Maybe, maybe not, but the trade value on that pick is more than worth it.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 23, 2011, 04:13:33 PM
Why would the Rams pick Luck?  He's no better than Bradford.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on December 23, 2011, 04:58:54 PM
I never said they would.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 23, 2011, 06:27:05 PM
I'm intrigued by the Jacksonville v. Indy game next week. I'm wondering which team will more effectively throw the game without throwing the game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 23, 2011, 07:25:41 PM
I never said they would.


It would be interesting to watch them make the choice though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on December 24, 2011, 09:44:26 AM
I never said they would.


It would be interesting to watch them make the choice though.

In a QB driven league, shouldn't whoever has the top pick swipe up the hottest prospect in years even if they just want to use him as trade bait to shore up the rest of their line up?  The dirty MtG player/trader in me says swipe the highly hyped prospect while speculation is up, trade him away for a pile of solid players to shore up your team.

Isn't the only reason not to pick Luck alienating your present QB?  Really, if that QB's name isn't one of the top 3/4, do it.


Am I missing something screwy with trade rules/draft rules/salary cap rules?  I like watching football, but don't really give a shit about trades, personalities, off season, or whatever.  I just like watching good football games.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 24, 2011, 12:08:04 PM
I never said they would.


It would be interesting to watch them make the choice though.

In a QB driven league, shouldn't whoever has the top pick swipe up the hottest prospect in years even if they just want to use him as trade bait to shore up the rest of their line up?  The dirty MtG player/trader in me says swipe the highly hyped prospect while speculation is up, trade him away for a pile of solid players to shore up your team.

Isn't the only reason not to pick Luck alienating your present QB?  Really, if that QB's name isn't one of the top 3/4, do it.


Am I missing something screwy with trade rules/draft rules/salary cap rules?  I like watching football, but don't really give a shit about trades, personalities, off season, or whatever.  I just like watching good football games.

Well yeah, they wouldn't take some shmoe and leave luck sitting.  A trade would be there, of course.  I don't think the trades in the NFL for draft picks are quite the big deal they are in the NBA.  I don't think they would necessarily get equal value for the trade.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on December 24, 2011, 01:16:05 PM
How can you not keep Manning?  I say trade away that first pick for some obscene deal that nets you more playmakers.  We've seen the Colts without Manning, they need more talent at least on offense.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 24, 2011, 01:31:59 PM
Sanchez, you are SO BAD.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on December 24, 2011, 01:34:20 PM
Well yeah, they wouldn't take some shmoe and leave luck sitting.  A trade would be there, of course.  I don't think the trades in the NFL for draft picks are quite the big deal they are in the NBA.  I don't think they would necessarily get equal value for the trade.
The Giants traded two 1st round picks and a 3rd round pick to the Chargers to get Eli Manning.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 24, 2011, 01:53:48 PM
Well yeah, they wouldn't take some shmoe and leave luck sitting.  A trade would be there, of course.  I don't think the trades in the NFL for draft picks are quite the big deal they are in the NBA.  I don't think they would necessarily get equal value for the trade.
The Giants traded two 1st round picks and a 3rd round pick to the Chargers to get Eli Manning.


That's not a good example of what I'm talking about.  You don't see high level draft picks dangled as often in the NFL as part of trades for existing, high level players like you do in the NBA.  And even draft day trades like that aren't as common.

Edit:  And by this I mean trades for players like Amare Staudemire or Chris Paul.  You just don't see players of that caliber traded very often in the NFL. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on December 24, 2011, 01:55:28 PM
Detroit leads San Diego 17-0, go Lions!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 24, 2011, 03:30:53 PM
Giants played well enough for Sanchez to completely self-destruct. The USC QB curse rides again.

Dallas saw that the Giants won and decided to not even show up against Philly because it doesn't matter. That and Romo hurt his hand in the first fucking quarter.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on December 24, 2011, 04:18:44 PM
(http://i228.photobucket.com/albums/ee135/k_night84/Detroit_Lions_Logo.jpg)

Lions are in the playoffs for the first time since 1999!  Truly, the dark reign of Matt Millen is over!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on December 24, 2011, 04:53:29 PM
Edit:  And by this I mean trades for players like Amare Staudemire or Chris Paul.  You just don't see players of that caliber traded very often in the NFL. 
The NBA doesn't have a franchise player tag like the NFL does.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 24, 2011, 05:37:39 PM
Good job Lions! I am happy to see a UGA quarterback finally have some success at the next level.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on December 24, 2011, 05:47:59 PM
Giants played well enough for Sanchez to completely self-destruct. The USC QB curse rides again.

Dallas saw that the Giants won and decided to not even show up against Philly because it doesn't matter. That and Romo hurt his hand in the first fucking quarter.

I R DUM.  Didn't realize football was on today.

Sorry Paelos.  Doesn't this just keep the Giants/Dallas neck and neck so that their last game is for all the marbles, or am I missing something? 

Hopefully this kills the "Fire Coughlin" push.  Yah, yah...  bad in second half of the season and dropped a huge amount of games in a row.  It was a nightmarish schedule, and along with the turkeys, his team put up some good games against top flight competition...  in a rebuilding year.


Also, looking at the box scores?  WTF happened this week???  Those are some bizarre fucking stats.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on December 24, 2011, 06:00:38 PM
Edit:  And by this I mean trades for players like Amare Staudemire or Chris Paul.  You just don't see players of that caliber traded very often in the NFL. 
The NBA doesn't have a franchise player tag like the NFL does.

Also, the contract structure is completely different.

If an NFL team trades a player who signed a contract with a salary bonus, the remaining cap obligation from that signing bonus (which is amortized over the length of the contract) immediately counts against the original team's cap.  As an example, if you trade a player one year into a five year deal that had a $20 million signing bonus, you would be out $16 million in cap room in the coming year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on December 24, 2011, 07:01:05 PM
Lions looked like a playoff team today. The roar? RESTORED


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 24, 2011, 08:37:11 PM
Giants played well enough for Sanchez to completely self-destruct. The USC QB curse rides again.

Dallas saw that the Giants won and decided to not even show up against Philly because it doesn't matter. That and Romo hurt his hand in the first fucking quarter.

I R DUM.  Didn't realize football was on today.

Sorry Paelos.  Doesn't this just keep the Giants/Dallas neck and neck so that their last game is for all the marbles, or am I missing something? 

Hopefully this kills the "Fire Coughlin" push.  Yah, yah...  bad in second half of the season and dropped a huge amount of games in a row.  It was a nightmarish schedule, and along with the turkeys, his team put up some good games against top flight competition...  in a rebuilding year.


Also, looking at the box scores?  WTF happened this week???  Those are some bizarre fucking stats.

Dallas losing didn't matter, because the Giants won. Just a quirk of the tiebreaker system basically.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on December 24, 2011, 09:47:43 PM
It did matter if they wanted to fight for a wild card spot but apparently they didn't care.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 24, 2011, 10:12:46 PM
Yeah, I think Dallas is so far behind on the wild card tiebreaker count that really all that matters is the NFC East title. Or they just threw their season away potentially. They looked completely inept. Of course, the Giants really didn't look much better. They got some really big plays but for the most part, their game was terrible. They can't run for shit against even a mildly competent team. And of course, the Jets could run ok but Sanchez self-destructed in his usual ways.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on December 25, 2011, 01:35:57 AM
Dallas had the tiebreaker against Atlanta because Dallas had the better conference record.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 25, 2011, 06:41:45 AM
Dallas had the tiebreaker against Atlanta because Dallas had the better conference record.


It was NFC East or bust. There's absolutely no way the Falcons were going to lose to Tampa in their last game. Have you guys seen Tampa? I'm pretty sure they are paying fans to take their place on the sidelines.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 25, 2011, 08:28:43 AM
Seems kind of fucking stupid to hang your hat entirely on beating the Giants in the last game. Yes, the Bucs have been playing like Down's Syndrome babies, but Atlanta hasn't been the model of high-level consistent play either. They could very well go in and lay an egg against both New Orleans and Tampa, no matter how unlikely that is. I think Dallas may end up regretting that choice, because I honestly think New York is going to beat them again, especially considering the Giants will be playing at home and Romo's status with the hand might be questionable. Garrett has made some decisions that are awful easy to criticize this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on December 25, 2011, 06:15:22 PM
This game is infuriating so far. God damn the Packers defense is terrible.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 26, 2011, 04:45:58 PM
Did you hear them talk about the stat where the Pack has given up more total yards than they have earned on offense, and yet is 15-1? That is one terrible defense that gets turnovers and big plays to mask its futility.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on December 26, 2011, 04:52:22 PM
Did you hear them talk about the stat where the Pack has given up more total yards than they have earned on offense, and yet is 15-1? That is one terrible defense that gets turnovers and big plays to mask its futility.

Yeah I heard that.

I watched the packers play Oakland and in that game their defense played about a million times better than they did last night. Hopefully their D will get their heads on straight for the lions/playoffs.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 26, 2011, 04:54:18 PM
Oh yeah, if the Pack wasn't 1) so good at getting ahead of teams on offense and 2) so good at getting INT's because the opponent has to throw the ball due to being down 14-0 in the 2nd quarter, their defense would be killing them. Kind of like the Colts defense has been the last few years. The weird part is that the defense is actually filled with some talented guys, they just have been giving up a lot more plays this year than last. They really need another pass rusher besides Matthews but losing Cullen Jenkins without really replacing those sacks is where they've fallen down.

Good thing they have an MVP QB and several MVP caliber wideouts.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on December 26, 2011, 05:46:10 PM
Did you hear them talk about the stat where the Pack has given up more total yards than they have earned on offense, and yet is 15-1? That is one terrible defense that gets turnovers and big plays to mask its futility.

I feel like this is the direction the league is heading though.  Big Plays on defense are becoming more important than plain old solid defense because its so damned hard for anyone to stop anyone with the current rule set which is clearly offense favored.   When the Saints won the Super Bowl they were very much like the Packers are this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 26, 2011, 08:40:15 PM
Drew Brees. Record-setter.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on December 26, 2011, 10:04:07 PM
You know what the worst part about losing my fantasy championship game by 10 points is?  It's that if I hadn't swapped out the Lion's defense for the Redskins at the last minute, I'd have won.   :facepalm: :cry2:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on December 26, 2011, 11:22:11 PM
Can someone explain the franchise tag to me please?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 26, 2011, 11:43:48 PM
The team designates a player as a franchise player - this is usually a player they would lose through free agency. They are then required to give the player a 1-year tender that is the average of the top 5 or 10 players at his position (this may have changed since the new CBA). It's a way to keep a player cheaper than you'd normally have to if he hit the free agent market.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on December 27, 2011, 09:38:52 AM
I'm sure that everyone saw this already, but it's so awesome, it has to be shown again.

(http://cdn.ksk.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/jerome-simpson-flip.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on December 27, 2011, 09:52:25 AM
Pure athleticism.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 27, 2011, 10:23:32 AM
I'm sure that everyone saw this already, but it's so awesome, it has to be shown again.

(http://cdn.ksk.uproxx.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/jerome-simpson-flip.gif)

That was one of those plays that I was describing to people, only to have them go 'Meh' until they actually SAW it. Goddamn that was amazing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on December 27, 2011, 12:43:15 PM
I can't look at it without thinking he's doing a really shitty job of protecting the ball.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on December 27, 2011, 12:54:25 PM
He also didn't "stick" the landing as others are saying cause he put his hand down :oh_i_see: :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on December 27, 2011, 03:51:32 PM
That is only a .2 deduction though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on December 27, 2011, 05:46:48 PM
That is only a .2 deduction though.

That can cost you a fucking gold, man. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on December 28, 2011, 08:30:37 AM
I can't look at it without thinking he's doing a really shitty job of protecting the ball.  :why_so_serious:

Those sticky gloves they wear doa good job as long as no one actually bats the ball away.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on December 28, 2011, 12:51:33 PM
Yeah, I think Dallas is so far behind on the wild card tiebreaker count that really all that matters is the NFC East title. Or they just threw their season away potentially. They looked completely inept. Of course, the Giants really didn't look much better. They got some really big plays but for the most part, their game was terrible. They can't run for shit against even a mildly competent team. And of course, the Jets could run ok but Sanchez self-destructed in his usual ways.

Giants ran like shit in the first half (16 yards or someshit) but ran for 100+ in the second half.  I'll take that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on December 28, 2011, 02:00:16 PM
Giants are 3 point favorites at home. Remove the home point advantage, and that's just saying that nobody knows who is better between these two teams.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 28, 2011, 02:53:25 PM
Nobody knows because it all depends on which two teams show up. Will it be the shitty ones with Eli throwing 3 INT's and unable to run the ball or the ones that bowl over opponents and gave Green Bay all it could handle? Will it be the Romo that throws up 300 yards but can't get TD's and throws INT's or will it be the guy who makes TDs and no mistakes? They are just that inconsistent. It could be a blowout or it could be a tight game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on December 28, 2011, 04:49:11 PM
Nobody knows because it all depends on which two teams show up. Will it be the shitty ones with Eli throwing 3 INT's and unable to run the ball or the ones that bowl over opponents and gave Green Bay all it could handle? Will it be the Romo that throws up 300 yards but can't get TD's and throws INT's or will it be the guy who makes TDs and no mistakes? They are just that inconsistent. It could be a blowout or it could be a tight game.

Yah.

The Giants have looked like world-beaters (NE, GB, SF... outside a 3 minute window where they gave up 14 points), and have looked plain awful.  The Cowboys seem to have a much stronger team on paper, but they just can't put it together....  not as bad as last season, but they should be a lock for the playoffs with that lineup.


It's all going to come down to Giants pass rushing, but that's the story of the team since the '80s.  If Pierre-Paul or Tuck have a good game, win Giants.  If not, then non-Eli face Manning needs to show up and have a good game.  I just haven't watched enough Cowboys games to know what their problem is....  I mean, like I said, they should have been a lock for the playoffs just judging on talent.

Compared to the Giants, who basically got lucky that Cruz (and a lesser extent Ballard) have both been playing great football, and Eli has been coming into his own.  Running game is bleh, the veteran WRs are always injured, Tuck has been injured and the rest of the defense is meh.....


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 28, 2011, 08:21:52 PM
The Cowboys have a great front 7 on defense but a weak secondary (which is kind of common in the NFL these days, mainly because the pass interference rules so heavily favor the passing game). Their running game has been suspect. Felix Jones was hurt early so their running game sucked, then they got Murray and were world-beaters until he got hurt. Their O line has been a work in progress. Their receiving corps is not very deep - Austin is overrated and has been hurt. Bryant is pretty damn good but can disappear at times. Witten is still their most reliable receiver but their offense isn't really built around the tight end position like San Diego's was when Gates was all they had. And Romo is prone to fits of Favritis but without the experience to make it work.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on December 29, 2011, 10:32:47 AM
I'm not worried about JPP not coming to play, but Tuck needs to step up like he did against the Jets and not disappear like he did the last time he played the Cowboys.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Stewie on December 30, 2011, 07:31:49 AM
I'm not sure what to do in my Fantasy leagues championship game.
I have Aaron Rodgers as my starter but figure he might get less than a half of playing time. I have Matt Moore as my back up. I am not sure who to start.

I think AR may be able to put up 200+ yds and 2 tds in that <half he may play. which I would be happy with but 150ish and 1 td is probably more realistic.
I'm soo torn. Anyone have any advice/thoughts?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on December 30, 2011, 02:23:48 PM
I won our little FFB league! Whee!

I don't even want to think about the Giants/Cowboys game. It'll just give me a headache.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on December 30, 2011, 08:52:09 PM
I feel like this has been the story of the giants for the past decade really, at least since they got Manning (what is he, 7th year?).   As a Giants fan I am 100% confident that they can beat, or lose to, any single team in the league.  I mean I guess you could maybe say that about anyone, but it seems like they just seem to lack that something that gives me confidence that they know what the hell they are actually doing instead of just stumbling upon it from time to time.  Even the year they won the super bowl, they just managed to pull their shit together for enough games in a row, its not like they were a dominant team all year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on December 30, 2011, 09:38:41 PM
The Giants have a good coach and good playmakers.  A storied franchise and a bipolar team.  I have NO idea how the Giants will do any given Sunday.

Oh and Rex Ryan?  I've honestly enjoyed your antics, but since your team didn't make the playoffs, maybe next year not so much with the bombast.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on December 31, 2011, 12:36:09 AM
Matt Moore is playing against the Jets. I'm thinking even Rodgers for a half would be better than Moore for a whole game against the Jets defense.

And the Jets still have a chance to make the playoffs. They are in the driver's seat.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on December 31, 2011, 08:08:11 AM
I feel like this has been the story of the giants for the past decade really, at least since they got Manning (what is he, 7th year?).   As a Giants fan I am 100% confident that they can beat, or lose to, any single team in the league.  I mean I guess you could maybe say that about anyone, but it seems like they just seem to lack that something that gives me confidence that they know what the hell they are actually doing instead of just stumbling upon it from time to time.  Even the year they won the super bowl, they just managed to pull their shit together for enough games in a row, its not like they were a dominant team all year.

The Giants have lots of inconsistency, but going back to Parcells/Simms they have always had lots of inconsistency.  Look at those years.  They won two Super Bowls, and in between they were mediocre.  On defense, they have always hung their hats on a couple of great players...  literally, when LT played, opposing teams had to have an LT strategy.  If you could neutralize him (there's a great section in The Blind Side about LT), then you could roll up the dee. 

Simms was good, but he wasn't great and he had bad years, plus he may never make it into the Hall of Fame.  Eli is the same...  he's a guy that can play at the highest level, but on average he is knocking around the bottom portion of the top 10.  Their O is based around having a bunch of good to pretty good players, but I can't remember since I've been alive that they have ever had a truly great Offensive player.

It makes for a team that, when they fall apart, they are truly awful.  When they are on, it's like watching a machine where all the parts are firing and guys you don't know are coming up big.  It was never designed as a team like SF in it's heydey, or NE now, or GB.  They don't have the big playmaker WR, or the fallback great runner, or a Best of All Time QB.

I think the Bears are pretty similar right now, except that Forte is amazing.  Cutler is a good QB, they have a decent dee and can be great on O.  The offensive line was sucking, but they seemed to have that fixed before Cutler went down.


If the Giants get into the playoffs, opposing teams should be very worried about them.  On a good day, I think they can smash anyone.  On a bad day, you may smash them but you have to worry about the pass rush ruining your QB.  If it's a situation where the team is worried about losing Coughlin (despite the fact that he looks like the old man from Up, the team seems to love him) watch out. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 01, 2012, 09:44:34 AM
God damnit why do I have to be in the "Chicago market"? I want to watch the packers not the bears and lions.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 01, 2012, 09:57:25 AM
For those who were going to use Rodgers are your fantasy QB - he's inactive today against the Lions.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 01, 2012, 12:50:24 PM
Congrats to the Colts :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 01, 2012, 01:35:24 PM
Matt Flynn...  :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 01, 2012, 01:42:08 PM
So if Rodgers had taken every snap for the Packers this season and the stats that Flynn put up would have been on his totals he would have thrown over 5000 yards and 51 touchdowns o.O .

Think about it, the single game passing yardage and touchdown records gor the team don't belong to Brett Favee or Aaron Rodgers, they belong to Matt Flynn...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 01, 2012, 01:53:34 PM
20 minutes into the game and it's Falcons 35, Bucs 0 :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 01, 2012, 04:07:41 PM
Looks like Denver will back into the AFC West title :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 01, 2012, 04:20:58 PM
Great, the Lions go to NO and play the Saints.  GB with a 2nd string QB puts up 40+pts, what will Drew Brees do?



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 01, 2012, 05:26:04 PM
Ok, I want the cowboys to win now simply because of the way one of the Giants lineman said his school as "university of chief illiniwek"

Fucking asshat.  :mob:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 01, 2012, 05:41:40 PM
Victor Cruz is such a great player and story.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 01, 2012, 06:05:16 PM
Rain and injured Romo = no shot


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 01, 2012, 06:07:00 PM
Looks bad for the Cowboys -- Romo is getting pummeled with 3 sacks already.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 01, 2012, 06:11:35 PM
Perfect turnover opportunity for the Cowboys and Manning gets it back :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 01, 2012, 06:14:37 PM
But the FG is missed!  Dallas finally gets a break, will they step up?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 01, 2012, 06:34:27 PM
But the FG is missed!  Dallas finally gets a break, will they step up?

Romo stepped up all right...up about two yards too far upfield.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 01, 2012, 06:35:54 PM
Should've just run for the first down :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 01, 2012, 06:37:54 PM
Alright this Cowboys team can't even line up on D right.

This is shameful. This isn't even the Cowboys. These fuckers don't deserve to wear the Star.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 01, 2012, 07:09:47 PM
Great halftime adjustments let the Boys score a TD.  It's back to being a game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 01, 2012, 07:12:52 PM
Only if the Dallas D decides to wake up.

Edit: speak of the devil :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 01, 2012, 07:54:18 PM
Victor Cruz is such a great player and story.
Yup.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 01, 2012, 07:59:55 PM
Manning and Cruz are playing LIGHTS OUT!  Two possession game so I'll go to bed, Boys can't possibly win now.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on January 01, 2012, 11:29:34 PM
I won't quote anyone specific, but you Cowboys fans are hilarious.  Playoffs?  Only chance they have of that is by winning their division, and I don't see that happening.  I don't see more than six wins remaining on their schedule, and it could easily end up being fewer.  I'll admit that it is hard to figure out who the best team in the east is right now, but it sure as shit can't be the Cowboys, and thank goodness for that.

Cowboys were 2 and 3 at the time of the above quote.  I like you people as human beings, but as Cowboys fans you can SUCK IT!!  :awesome_for_real:

In all seriousness, if you look back at their wins....there was only one of any quality, and that was an early squeaker against a 49er team that didn't yet realize it was supposed to win that game.  Two very close wins against the Redskins, and then absolutely rolled twice each by Philly and NY (okay, one was close).  The mistake everyone makes is that because we see this team in the spotlight so often, we get to know the players very well.  And when that happens, you naturally begin to think they are better than they really are.  The oft maligned Romo actually ended up having a pretty good year, and the end result is still a mediocre Cowboys team.  They just aren't as good as you believed them to be.  They ended up third in the division, behind a Philly team that had an unbelievably terrible start.

No reason to think it gets better next year, either.  If anything, confidence level must be low...maybe JJ will feel like he has to shake things up a bit.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 02, 2012, 12:27:45 AM
Yeah, the Cowboys players are very overrated. Romo, Witten and Ware are really good, as is Bryant, but Austin? Not great. I was really disappointed by Felix Jones this year. I thought he'd be a beast.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 02, 2012, 08:03:51 AM
Guys, the cowboys problems are mostly on D. They need to solve the Doug Free problem on O line too.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on January 02, 2012, 09:32:52 AM
Your QB is a loser too.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 02, 2012, 10:48:27 AM
Guys, the cowboys problems are mostly on D. They need to solve the Doug Free problem on O line too.

While it's certainly true their secondary sucks monkey ass and has for years, that's certainly not their only problem - and I think their front 7 is really pretty good (Lee, Ware and Raitliff being the top players in that crew). They can't keep a #1 running back healthy. Their O line is shoddy. Despite gaudy QB numbers from Romo (and I really don't think he's a loser), their best, most consistent receiver is still their TE. The team should be a lot better than this because the pieces have been in place together for years (except for the RB). And somehow, Romo has got to learn to not make stupid mistakes, which probably starts with keeping him upright.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 02, 2012, 10:59:06 AM
Yeah, Eli. You keep throwing those big boy touchdowns (http://www.onionsportsnetwork.com/articles/eli-manning-throws-bigboy-touchdown,26624/).

Now I get another week of "oh god I don't even want to think about it" for the Giants! Whee!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 02, 2012, 11:11:34 AM
Your QB is a loser too.

Classy as always. Y'all should destroy a bad Falcons team. Don't fuck it up.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on January 02, 2012, 11:57:25 PM
I think Romo is good, but he sure as shit isn't clutch.  I also think he loses confidence to easily sometimes.  At any rate, the whole "guys, it's only their D that is bad" doesn't work here.  For starters, that seems to be true of 90% of the teams this year.  And beyond that, your Defense is 50% of the formula (I am ingoring Special Teams on purpose).  It isn't like having a poor D is a small problem.  It's a huge problem.  Decent offense, bad defense.  8 and 8 in a weakening division and against a very soft schedule.  All adds up rather well, to be honest.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 03, 2012, 02:25:29 AM
My main opinion of Romo is "man he gets pounded sometimes."


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on January 03, 2012, 03:37:18 AM
Is there a :Romoface: ?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on January 03, 2012, 04:40:57 AM
Is there a :Romoface: ?

(http://www.dallascowboygirl.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/tony-romo-crying.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on January 03, 2012, 04:44:24 AM
Heh.  As much as I don't like the Cowboys, I can't bring myself to dislike Romo directly.  Not sure why that is.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on January 03, 2012, 07:36:14 AM

(http://i977.photobucket.com/albums/ae252/farbekrieg/romolicious.png)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 03, 2012, 07:46:25 AM
Heh.  As much as I don't like the Cowboys, I can't bring myself to dislike Romo directly.  Not sure why that is.

Maybe you just can't help having the teensiest but of respect/envy towards a guy who shagged Jessica Simpson?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 03, 2012, 11:51:40 AM
http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7420169/san-diego-chargers-coach-norv-turner-gm-aj-smith-keep-jobs

How the hell? I don't even...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 03, 2012, 11:52:32 AM
Was just coming here to post that.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 03, 2012, 11:54:45 AM
Chargers owner must be deliberately trying to tank them so he can move north to LA (though my bet is still on Jacksonville being the team to move to LA in 3 years)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 03, 2012, 11:59:33 AM
Yeah, I got nothing. That team is a trainwreck waiting to happen and what's worst is they have just enough talent not to lose enough games to get a really high draft pick. Not that they need an Andrew Luck or a QB, but man do they need some help on the O line, defense, running back and wide out positions.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 03, 2012, 12:03:56 PM
Yeah, I got nothing. That team is a trainwreck waiting to happen and what's worst is they have just enough talent not to lose enough games to get a really high draft pick. Not that they need an Andrew Luck or a QB, but man do they need some help on the O line, defense, running back and wide out positions.

Sounds like Cleveland but add in the QB since McCoy is about done here... though the Defense for the Browns this year was the only glimmering bright spot.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 03, 2012, 12:24:23 PM
I really thought Colt McCoy would last there.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 03, 2012, 12:55:30 PM
I really thought Colt McCoy would last there.

 :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 03, 2012, 01:16:27 PM
I did. I saw him in some games last year when Cleveland had a running game with Hillis and he looked good. Not great, but like he could really be a good game manager type of QB, maybe even a little better if he had any sort of weapons at wideout. I forgot that Cleveland is where QB's go to die.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 03, 2012, 01:17:30 PM
I did. I saw him in some games last year when Cleveland had a running game with Hillis and he looked good. Not great, but like he could really be a good game manager type of QB, maybe even a little better if he had any sort of weapons at wideout. I forgot that Cleveland is where QB's FOOTBALL PLAYERS go to die.

Much better with a little editing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 03, 2012, 01:29:08 PM
Good ol' Norvelous Norv.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 03, 2012, 01:43:56 PM
How does Jim Caldwell still have a job?!?!?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 03, 2012, 02:00:31 PM
How does Jim Caldwell still have a job?!?!?

He still has a winning percentage over 50% even with this year's debacle?  Also, he will probably be gone once Polian's replacement is hired.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Hutch on January 03, 2012, 02:03:05 PM
How does Jim Caldwell still have a job?!?!?

Because he doesn't work for the Bears?

Jerry Angelo (GM) fired (http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/01/03/angelo-out-as-bears-gm/)

Mike Martz (offensive coordinator) resigns before they can fire him, too (http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2012/01/03/report-martz-resigns/)

To his credit, the Bears have an overall winning record under Angelo. And they went to their first Super Bowl since 1985. But he was a terrible drafter. Most of his good moves were with trades and free agency. Cutler's injury made it starkly obvious how bad things are in Chicago. The Bears were 7-3 with Cutler, and finished 8-8 without him, with that final win coming against the even-more-pathetic Vikings. The local sports talkers have been using the phrase "bare cupboard" a lot.

Martz. He needs to find a team where the personnel can actually perform his offense. Either that or develop his offense into something that doesn't require a perfect roster to run it effectively.

Good luck to both men.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Segoris on January 03, 2012, 02:09:19 PM
According to pft (http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/01/02/irsay-caldwell-is-under-evaluation/) the main reasons are 1) he's respected by his players and 2) that if Manning returns they wouldn't want to change their whole offense to fit a new coach's when they have a hall of famer QB with a mastery of their current system 3) replacing the Polians is taking a higher priority

The 50%+ winning percentage with Dungy's leftovers and a future hall of fame qb who runs the offense (to such a degree that he can even make substitutions after lining up and reading a defensive scheme) isn't as telling as the 2-14 performance without that QB



On another note: Angelo and Martz are gone from the Bears Organization  :yahoo:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 03, 2012, 02:19:53 PM
I'm pretty sure a cardboard cutout of Jim Caldwell could coach in place of Jim Caldwell.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 03, 2012, 03:05:41 PM
I'm pretty sure a cardboard cutout of Jim Caldwell could coach in place of Jim Caldwell.

How can you be sure that wasn't the case?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 03, 2012, 03:55:38 PM
Sounds like Bears ownership made the right moves.  Lovie Smith and Cutler aren't the problem.  Jim Caldwell...I'm sorry but every time they show him he has a face like he ordered steak and got shrimp.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on January 03, 2012, 10:29:14 PM
Caldwell has to go, I mean come on.  The man hasn't uttered a single word in the last 2 or 3 years.  Pretty sure he is functionally mute.  It's tough to run a football team that way.

Heh.  As much as I don't like the Cowboys, I can't bring myself to dislike Romo directly.  Not sure why that is.

Maybe you just can't help having the teensiest but of respect/envy towards a guy who shagged Jessica Simpson?

You know, I think that's it exactly.  Pretty sure he drilled Carrie Underwood too, which is nothing to throw a stick at.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 04, 2012, 05:46:18 AM
The only reason I hate Romo is because he plays for the Cowboys, who I also hate. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 04, 2012, 07:50:05 AM
Why would Jim Caldwell need to speak when he has a coach playing QB?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on January 04, 2012, 10:53:51 PM
Indeed.  Only that doesn't work when your current QB used to be your jock strap passer outer.

The only reason I hate Romo is because he plays for the Cowboys, who I also hate. 

Wait....don't you live in Texas?  I mean, I know there is another team there, but I thought loving the Cowboys required by your state's constitution.  Along with owning weapons and loving your cousins.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ruvaldt on January 05, 2012, 12:07:32 AM
Maybe ghost is just hopeful for a San Antonio expansion team.  Or at least one that isn't in the CFL USA.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 05, 2012, 02:47:46 PM
I live in Texas but I'm not from here.  I grew up a Patriots and Jets fan, but I'm not a huge fan of any team.  I don't like the Cowboys and never really have.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on January 06, 2012, 03:57:58 AM
Uh...is the Pick 'Em league not open for picks in the playoff rounds?  I can't see any way to make my picks...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 06, 2012, 04:03:40 AM
Uh...is the Pick 'Em league not open for picks in the playoff rounds?  I can't see any way to make my picks...

If you are talking about the Yahoo one, no. I poked around there for 20 minutes yesterday and never found anything for the playoffs


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on January 06, 2012, 04:28:27 AM
Playoff Picks for pickem now active.  Had to change a setting.

http://football.fantasysports.yahoo.com/pickem/22848

Rankings as of the end of the Regular Season

1   01101010  172   172-84
2   jwiv's Ratbirds 171   171-85
3   Cychopaths 171   171-85
4   Nebu's Neurotics 170   170-86
5   Kilt Wavers 163   163-93


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on January 06, 2012, 04:55:21 AM
Cool.

It looks like Mr Digits is going to win.  I'm not happy about that, as I've never lost a pick 'em league before.  That combined with my terrible Fantasy finish, and I am not thrilled with my football prediction abilities this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on January 06, 2012, 06:06:30 AM
Cool.

It looks like Mr Digits is going to win.  I'm not happy about that, as I've never lost a pick 'em league before.  That combined with my terrible Fantasy finish, and I am not thrilled with my football prediction abilities this year.

I just can't believe after leading all season, I blew it the last few weeks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 07, 2012, 04:52:36 PM
LET'S GO LIONS!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on January 07, 2012, 05:04:29 PM
LET'S GO LIONS!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 07, 2012, 05:12:45 PM
Fumble!!!!!!

My god these teams have shitty defenses  :drillf:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 07, 2012, 05:17:54 PM
Lions lead, but things are starting to get chippy.  Is the Suhstomp (tm) far behind?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 07, 2012, 05:55:15 PM
Fumble!!!!!!!!!   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 07, 2012, 05:59:13 PM
Yeah, fumble and the refs blow the whistle too fast and rob the Lions of a TD.

GODDAMMIT!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 07, 2012, 06:01:53 PM
Yeah, fumble and the refs blow the whistle too fast and rob the Lions of a TD.

GODDAMMIT!

The refs in position to see the actual drop weren't the ones blowing the whistle too. If Detroit loses by 7 or less that call will be like the infamous Brady one in the snow.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 07, 2012, 06:22:49 PM
WTB the return of real intentional grounding and the end of the "tuck rule".


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 07, 2012, 06:59:28 PM
This is bullshit. Just give the Lions a fair shake refs.  Helmet hit, generous spot for first down, Brees pulls the ball back on 4th down and still gets 1st down.  All in favor of the Saints.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 07, 2012, 07:01:40 PM
This is bullshit. Just give the Lions a fair shake refs.  Helmet hit, generous spot for first down, Brees pulls the ball back on 4th down and still gets 1st down.  All in favor of the Saints.



The Brees dive was a good call, the previous one was a Pac12 ref spot though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Evil Elvis on January 07, 2012, 07:23:57 PM
The Lions can't make a tackle for the life of them.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 07, 2012, 07:25:15 PM
The Lions can't make a tackle for the life of them.

Or catch balls thrown right into their hands by Brees.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on January 07, 2012, 07:28:09 PM
The Lions can't make a tackle for the life of them.

Or catch balls thrown right into their hands by Brees.

You couldn't throw a prettier ball to a defender, and he still fucking missed it.  Unbelievable.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 07, 2012, 07:33:29 PM
Stick a fork in the kitties.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 07, 2012, 07:37:11 PM
Annnnnd it's over.  Grats to a great Saints team, I'll be rooting for them against the 49'ers.

 :heartbreak:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 07, 2012, 08:01:59 PM
And the Saints are *still* throwing it deep :awesome_for_real: :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on January 07, 2012, 09:07:02 PM
As a Lions fan I don't think they deserved to win, but that was some shady officiating.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 07, 2012, 09:23:05 PM
Officiating wasn't great, but the Lions couldn't tackle, or stop the Saints.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 08, 2012, 01:19:21 PM
Yay, the good Giants played today!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on January 08, 2012, 03:10:30 PM
Yay, the good Giants played today!  :why_so_serious:

Not going to lie, I thought we were going to have an awesome day of Eli Face after he got nailed for the safety.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 08, 2012, 03:17:29 PM
Yay, the good Giants played today!  :why_so_serious:

Not going to lie, I thought we were going to have an awesome day of Eli Face after he got nailed for the safety.

I'm beginning to think the way you get a good performance out of the Giants is to threaten Coughlin's job. 


Also, Tebow showed up for the first half.  At this point, I want the Steelers to lose as Ben looks so gimpy they're dead men walking.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 08, 2012, 03:23:13 PM
Clearly Coughlin should only get one year contracts from now on!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ruvaldt on January 08, 2012, 03:48:49 PM
The Steelers were lucky to only be down 14 points at the half; Ben looked awful.  No matter which team comes out of this game though the real winners are the Pats.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on January 08, 2012, 04:58:34 PM
Wow, what the hell happened to the Steeler defense?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 08, 2012, 04:59:22 PM
Well shit for my pick, but I can say I am happy that my city is fucking quiet for once.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 08, 2012, 05:00:23 PM
Oh God, do I love football.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 08, 2012, 05:01:10 PM
Tebow averaged 30 yards per completion :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 08, 2012, 05:06:02 PM
Man, the Broncos are weird but hey, winning.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 08, 2012, 05:37:39 PM
(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/33271127/GODBOW.jpg)

 :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on January 08, 2012, 05:43:05 PM
As a Broncos fan, born in Denver, and raised in California... and an atheist.... let me just say

WHAT IS HAPPENING WHY IS THIS WORKING.

Thank you.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 08, 2012, 05:49:35 PM
Clearly Coughlin should only get one year contracts from now on!

Just leak ridiculous "Coughlin to be fired" shit to the NYC press whenever they lose a game.


Honestly though, if that Giants team shows up the rest of the playoffs?  I mean, your three major WRs are healthy and performing, the running game is working fairly well, and the pass rush is putting pressure on the QB.  It's the Giants, so next week Eli could throw 3 interceptions and Jacobs and Bradshaw will combine for 45 yards.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on January 08, 2012, 05:57:47 PM
Matt Ryan and the coaching staff played like chickenshits.  The Giants had one of the worst pass defenses (despite a good pass rush) all season and Ryan was throwing mostly short passes.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: DLRiley on January 08, 2012, 07:42:49 PM
TEEEEEBOOOOW TEEEEBOOOW


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 08, 2012, 08:19:24 PM
What I want more than anything right now is for Tebow to convert to Islam.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 08, 2012, 08:51:05 PM
Yeah Giants fans, I wouldn't put too much stock in beating the Falcons. I've said before they were awful, and they lived up to that.

That being said, I'd love for Eli to go to Lambeau and really drill the Packers just so I can stop hearing about repeat.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on January 08, 2012, 11:25:01 PM
Yeah, Atlanta just stunk.  I don't know how they every managed getting to the playoffs in the first place.  That said, I wouldn't put it past the Giants to go in and beat the Packers.

Tim Tebow beat the Steelers.  I mean, I know there were a lot of other little Broncos out there that helped, but let's face it:  Tim Tebow beat the Steelers.  At first I was all :awesome_for_real:, and then I was like  :oh_i_see:, but now I'm all  :grin:

Underestimate him at your folly, I guess.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Abagadro on January 09, 2012, 12:07:29 AM
The Pats will roflstomp the donkeys though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on January 09, 2012, 12:11:48 AM
I know!  They so will!

Only, that's what we (humankind) were all saying about the Pittsburgh game.

Seriously, of course the Pats will stomp them.  But I no longer believe it is a given.  Bellichick better have his team ready to play, and not take their regular season victory for granted.  I remember how flat the Pats came out in the playoffs last year.  They do that again, they'll be ripe for the picking.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Abagadro on January 09, 2012, 12:27:32 AM
Denver is crap on the road, going to the coast after an OT game, against a team with a week off. I fully expect a 3 TD margin for the Pats.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on January 09, 2012, 02:53:02 AM
I do too, really.  Maybe even 4 touchdowns.  But damn if I didn't think more or less the same thing yesterday. 

At any rate, I think people in general have to lay off all the Tebow/Bronco bashing.  Injuries notwithstanding, it is no joke to beat Pittsburgh in the playoffs (especially in the playoffs).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on January 09, 2012, 06:03:00 AM
We all seriously underestimated the rapist's ankle injury.  It was clearly impeding him in the first half.  In the second half, as is his nature, he ignored the risks and played like he usually does.  Tebow had finally given his team enough points to hold on, though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on January 09, 2012, 07:57:10 AM
Denver is crap on the road, going to the coast after an OT game, against a team with a week off. I fully expect a 3 TD margin for the Pats.

Denver's record this year was 3-5 at home and 5-3 on the road. The last game versus the Patriots was lost on the mistakes the Broncos made. Early on, they dominated the Pats.

That being said, I'm expecting a 41-27 loss. Because Brady > Tebow.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 09, 2012, 08:02:19 AM
Time to pray that the Packers defense that showed up for the Oakland game is the one that shows up for the Giants.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on January 09, 2012, 08:22:26 AM
We all seriously underestimated the rapist's ankle injury.  It was clearly impeding him in the first half.  In the second half, as is his nature, he ignored the risks and played like he usually does.  Tebow had finally given his team enough points to hold on, though.

There's more to it than that.  The Steelers defense gave up 316 yrds or so in the AIR to Tim Tebow of all fucking people.  Roethlisberger may not have been able to extend plays and scramble all over the field, but the Steelers secondary played extraordinarily poorly - even Polamalu was fairly quiet all night. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on January 09, 2012, 08:26:51 AM
What I want more than anything right now is for Tebow to convert to Islam.

I would buy a Tebow jersey if this happened. And then start attending church wearing it. At least during the offseason- my trolling has limits.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 09, 2012, 08:27:27 AM
We all seriously underestimated the rapist's ankle injury.  It was clearly impeding him in the first half.  In the second half, as is his nature, he ignored the risks and played like he usually does.  Tebow had finally given his team enough points to hold on, though.

There's more to it than that.  The Steelers defense gave up 316 yrds or so in the AIR to Tim Tebow of all fucking people.  Roethlisberger may not have been able to extend plays and scramble all over the field, but the Steelers secondary played extraordinarily poorly - even Polamalu was fairly quiet all night. 

The Stillers stacked the box and force Tebow to beat them through the air. Sadly, he did just that... but only barely.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on January 09, 2012, 08:33:25 AM
Right.  Tebow finally performed like a decent NFL QB, althouth the slow mo on some of those passes made it clear his spirals leave much to be desired.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on January 09, 2012, 08:55:43 AM
Wow, what the hell happened to the Steeler defense?

Age, injuries.

Front 3 by end of 1st quarter were all 2nd-3rd string (3rd string NT), though DE Heyward is a 1st round pick and should play better than he has.

Missing FS Ryan Clark, which did end up being a factor, as evidenced by big pass plays.

Polamalu, who, outside of a few diving scrimmage plays this season, seems to be missing in action since being injured last season.

Ike Taylor, ballyhooed this year as an outstanding corner was pwned by a Denver receiver I really wasn't familiar with until this game and he was dominated.

But Tebow did make some nice throws, putting the ball exactly where it needed to be put. And Broncos were aided by Steeler half ending / game ending drive offensive snafus including a backup center that had problems snapping the ball when requested and delivering it on target. Plus, some poor clock management that's plagued Steeler 2 minute offense all season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 09, 2012, 09:43:01 AM
Fuck's sake. TIM GODDAMN TEBOW BEAT THE STEELERS WITH LONG BOMBS. THE APOCALYPSE HAS TRULY BEGAN.

Seriously, though, good game on Tebow for taking what the Steelers were giving him and beating them about the head and neck with it. And shame on Dick Lebeau for not changing his game plan. When Tebow is beating you with long bombs constantly, it's time to keep two safeties back. After that second long pass in the 2nd quarter, there should have been no more of that shit, but apparently it's hard to figure that out or something. It was quite obvious that injuries were hampering the Steelers. The Rapist's ankle, no Rashard Mendenhall, no Ryan Clark and that was just the injuries before the game. The running game wasn't getting it done, and you could tell the Rapist just wasn't himself, which is why I had expected the Steelers to lose next week to New England. Who knew their pass defense would forget to show up.

The Falcons looked like shit. Oh and they just failed another 4th and 1. Seriously, how many times do you have to fuck that play up before you figure out what you're doing isn't working? I can't figure out what the fuck is wrong with Atlanta this year, they just aren't very good even at the things they are supposed to be good at. The Giants, meanwhile, didn't fuck up too badly (though looked bad in the first half) and their defense came to play.

The Saints and Lions game was lower scoring than I expected, but still a fun game to watch. Officiating on the whole was bad in every game, not just this one. What I expected to happen happened, the Lions lack of a running game combined with the Saints having 3 really good RB's made all the difference. Saints defense isn't that good, but when you can hang onto the ball in the 3rd and 4th quarters with a mix of runs and passes, you can win, especially when you never have to punt.

Houston's defensive line just DOMINATED Cincy. It wasn't even really that competitive. If Matt Schaub had been playing in that game, the Texans would have scored 40 points easy. Too bad the Ravens will pummel them next week.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 09, 2012, 11:46:04 AM
It baffles me the Steelers didn't have two deep safeties on that play in OT given the new playoff overtime rules. The only reasonable explanation I can think of is Dick LeBeau forgot the new rules.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 09, 2012, 12:29:46 PM
It baffles me the Steelers didn't have two deep safeties on that play in OT given the new playoff overtime rules. The only reasonable explanation I can think of is Dick LeBeau forgot the new rules.


Or had little faith in Tebow being able to, ya know, throw the ball down field. I will say though, that was one hell of a stiff arm, and to the chest no less.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on January 09, 2012, 01:41:15 PM
Right.  Tebow finally performed like a decent NFL QB, althouth the slow mo on some of those passes made it clear his spirals leave much to be desired.

Eh not really though.  He was 10/21 and that is pretty glaring.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on January 09, 2012, 01:45:23 PM
Interesting.  If I had been asked what I thought his completion % was, I would have guessed north of 70%.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 09, 2012, 01:49:22 PM
Right.  Tebow finally performed like a decent NFL QB, althouth the slow mo on some of those passes made it clear his spirals leave much to be desired.

Eh not really though.  He was 10/21 and that is pretty glaring.

He had a QBR 40 points higher then Ben.  You can be a sub 50% passer and win big if you are constantly completing for 20-30 yards.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 09, 2012, 01:57:24 PM
Hey Chiefs fans... get used to your new head coach (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7442018/kansas-city-chiefs-name-romeo-crennel-coach)!

Cleveland fans can tell you a little more of what you have waiting in store for you.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on January 09, 2012, 02:16:49 PM
I guess the thing with Tebow and defending against him, is your always going to be short one defender, because of how well he runs and having to at least 'respect' his passing ability now.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 09, 2012, 02:17:44 PM
Hey Chiefs fans... get used to your new head coach (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7442018/kansas-city-chiefs-name-romeo-crennel-coach)!

Cleveland fans can tell you a little more of what you have waiting in store for you.

A factory of sadness franchise.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 09, 2012, 02:18:23 PM
I'd like to see what happens to him against a defense like the 49ers with multiple awesome linebackers, but I suspect the odds of that particular Super Bowl matchup are very low.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 09, 2012, 02:19:38 PM
Hey Chiefs fans... get used to your new head coach (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7442018/kansas-city-chiefs-name-romeo-crennel-coach)!

Cleveland fans can tell you a little more of what you have waiting in store for you.

What the fuck is wrong with some of these teams?  Jesus fucking christ this was stupid, and I don't even like the Chiefs.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 09, 2012, 02:21:17 PM
It baffles me the Steelers didn't have two deep safeties on that play in OT given the new playoff overtime rules. The only reasonable explanation I can think of is Dick LeBeau forgot the new rules.
Or had little faith in Tebow being able to, ya know, throw the ball down field. I will say though, that was one hell of a stiff arm, and to the chest no less.
Tebow torched them multiple times in the 2nd quarter with long passes. Two of them in fact were bombs to Thomas where he beat Turner, just like what happened in OT. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me; fool me three times and I'm a fucking idiot.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 09, 2012, 02:21:39 PM
I'd like to see what happens to him against a defense like the 49ers with multiple awesome linebackers, but I suspect the odds of that particular Super Bowl matchup are very low.

Montana vs Elway?  :why_so_serious:

no wait...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 09, 2012, 02:23:11 PM
Measuring people's ability for success by how well they did in Cleveland is probably a bit harsh though. Cleveland is the town where football goes to die, after all.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 09, 2012, 02:28:09 PM
Measuring people's ability for success by how well they did in Cleveland is probably a bit harsh though. Cleveland is the town where football goes to die, after all.

Belichick might have words for you though...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on January 09, 2012, 02:30:08 PM
It baffles me the Steelers didn't have two deep safeties on that play in OT given the new playoff overtime rules. The only reasonable explanation I can think of is Dick LeBeau forgot the new rules.
Or had little faith in Tebow being able to, ya know, throw the ball down field. I will say though, that was one hell of a stiff arm, and to the chest no less.
Tebow torched them multiple times in the 2nd quarter with long passes. Two of them in fact were bombs to Thomas where he beat Turner, just like what happened in OT. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me; fool me three times and I'm a fucking idiot.


^^ This.

A backup receiver (played in 11, only started 5) who I never heard of totally abused Ike Taylor, a CB heralded (at least until this playoff game ;() as one of the better DBs in the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 09, 2012, 02:33:46 PM
Measuring people's ability for success by how well they did in Cleveland is probably a bit harsh though. Cleveland is the town where football goes to die, after all.

Belichick might have words for you though...

Not sure what you mean:
Quote
From Wikipedia:

After spending his first 15 seasons in the league as an assistant coach, Belichick got his first head coaching job with the Cleveland Browns in 1991. Of his five seasons coaching Cleveland, only one featured a winning record...

That pretty much agrees with my point.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 09, 2012, 02:34:18 PM
Measuring people's ability for success by how well they did in Cleveland is probably a bit harsh though. Cleveland is the town where football goes to die, after all.

He'll be fine in KC. They have good BBQ.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 09, 2012, 02:36:13 PM
He'll be fine in KC. They have good the best BBQ.

Fixed it for you.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 09, 2012, 02:40:31 PM
Actually, Lockhart, Texas, has the best barbecue. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 09, 2012, 02:41:50 PM
I guess the thing with Tebow and defending against him, is your always going to be short one defender, because of how well he runs and having to at least 'respect' his passing ability now.

Yeah, that's what you have a "spy" linebacker for. There was no reason for Polamalu to be playing the 4th linebacker in a 4-3 defense.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 09, 2012, 04:09:55 PM
Hey Chiefs fans... get used to your new head coach (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7442018/kansas-city-chiefs-name-romeo-crennel-coach)!
Cleveland fans can tell you a little more of what you have waiting in store for you.
What the fuck is wrong with some of these teams?  Jesus fucking christ this was stupid, and I don't even like the Chiefs.
I don't see a problem with that choice. They were 2 - 1 under Crennel, they beat the previously undefeated Packers and the players apparently love playing for him.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 09, 2012, 04:11:41 PM
And as previously pointed out he had an actual winning season in Cleveland, which puts him in a pretty exclusive club with Belichek.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 09, 2012, 04:45:24 PM
Measuring people's ability for success by how well they did in Cleveland is probably a bit harsh though. Cleveland is the town where football goes to die, after all.

Belichick might have words for you though...

Not sure what you mean:
Quote
From Wikipedia:

After spending his first 15 seasons in the league as an assistant coach, Belichick got his first head coaching job with the Cleveland Browns in 1991. Of his five seasons coaching Cleveland, only one featured a winning record...

That pretty much agrees with my point.

I mean he turned out ok.. which seems to be Cleveland's MO. A lot of talent goes through Cleveland. We are the farm teams of the nation.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on January 10, 2012, 09:05:34 AM
I guess the thing with Tebow and defending against him, is your always going to be short one defender, because of how well he runs and having to at least 'respect' his passing ability now.

Yeah, that's what you have a "spy" linebacker for. There was no reason for Polamalu to be playing the 4th linebacker in a 4-3 defense.


I don't know what a "spy" linebacker is.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 10, 2012, 09:09:55 AM
One linebacker "spies" on the QB (or another player). Essentially they follow the QB with their eyes until they see what the QB is going to do - will he run (if so, go hit the motherfucker in the jaw) or will he pass (go back in coverage or try to tackle the guy catching the ball) or will he hand the ball off (go tackle the running back). Teams use a spy against someone like Cam Newton or Michael Vick to try to shut down the scramble/run/option part of the equation. Against a guy like Brady or Manning, you don't need one because if that QB is running, your pass rush and/or coverage has done it's job and he likely won't be able to hurt you too bad running the ball.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 10, 2012, 09:13:35 AM
It baffles me the Steelers didn't have two deep safeties on that play in OT given the new playoff overtime rules. The only reasonable explanation I can think of is Dick LeBeau forgot the new rules.
Or had little faith in Tebow being able to, ya know, throw the ball down field. I will say though, that was one hell of a stiff arm, and to the chest no less.
Tebow torched them multiple times in the 2nd quarter with long passes. Two of them in fact were bombs to Thomas where he beat Turner, just like what happened in OT. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me; fool me three times and I'm a fucking idiot.

So I'm not the only one that hears "Ike Taylor" and my brain immediately substitutes "Ike Turner"?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on January 10, 2012, 09:15:58 AM
One linebacker "spies" on the QB (or another player). Essentially they follow the QB with their eyes until they see what the QB is going to do - will he run (if so, go hit the motherfucker in the jaw) or will he pass (go back in coverage or try to tackle the guy catching the ball) or will he hand the ball off (go tackle the running back). Teams use a spy against someone like Cam Newton or Michael Vick to try to shut down the scramble/run/option part of the equation. Against a guy like Brady or Manning, you don't need one because if that QB is running, your pass rush and/or coverage has done it's job and he likely won't be able to hurt you too bad running the ball.


I would have thought that was a Linebackers job by default?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 10, 2012, 09:25:40 AM
Not really. As I understand it, a linebacker's job is either 1) blitz the QB, 2) move back into coverage, either by covering a specific area of the field (zone coverage) or covering a specific man (man-to-man coverage - this is usually the RB or a TE, but can be a wideout in the slot), 3) fill a gap on the offensive line to keep a running back from busting through a hole. They generally aren't meant to watch the QB except as it relates to pass coverage or blitzing. This is why running QB's can be so dangerous in the NFL - there's nobody really assigned to stop them other than blitzing them and running QB's are very good at evading the pass rush and breaking open 10-20 yard runs. They just aren't usually great passers (see Tim Tebow).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on January 10, 2012, 09:53:46 AM
Well I predict that next year it will be the default, after Tebow wins the super bowl with a drop kick.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on January 10, 2012, 09:56:29 AM
Well I predict that next year it will be the default, after Tebow wins the super bowl with a drop kick.  :why_so_serious:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO5Y1OuQIxo


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 10, 2012, 09:57:35 AM
Well I predict that next year it will be the default, after Tebow wins the super bowl with a drop kick.  :why_so_serious:

I thought the drop kick was no longer allowed in American football.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 10, 2012, 10:16:31 AM
One linebacker "spies" on the QB (or another player). Essentially they follow the QB with their eyes until they see what the QB is going to do - will he run (if so, go hit the motherfucker in the jaw) or will he pass (go back in coverage or try to tackle the guy catching the ball) or will he hand the ball off (go tackle the running back). Teams use a spy against someone like Cam Newton or Michael Vick to try to shut down the scramble/run/option part of the equation. Against a guy like Brady or Manning, you don't need one because if that QB is running, your pass rush and/or coverage has done it's job and he likely won't be able to hurt you too bad running the ball.
I would have thought that was a Linebackers job by default?
If you don't have a player spying the QB full time then in theory on defense you have an "extra" guy that the offense can not account for. E.g. on run plays since the QB doesn't block (unless it's a reverse or something) there's 10 guys on offense trying to block 11 guys on defense so in theory you have an unblocked run tackler. The reason why the leading tackler on a team is usually a linebacker or strong safety is cause they are the ones that let their teammates engage the run blockers and they make the tackle. On pass plays if you rush the same number of people as the offense has pass blocking and if you drop a LB into coverage that allows one of your defensive backs to double cover the other team's most dangerous receiver. Or if you are willing to risk single coverage you can blitz that extra player giving you an unblocked pass rusher.

If you have somebody spying the quarterback full time you lose that "extra" man advantage and given that the rules currently favor offenses over defenses you really don't want to lose that extra guy unless the opposing QB is such a threat to run that you have no other choice.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on January 10, 2012, 10:28:58 AM
QB Spy is pretty much a package... and they likely had one, given that Tebow is the wildcard in the broncos offense. The problem is the option package that Denver is employing gives it every chance to change it at almost any point. The play that scored was a play action, and initially the backs bit on it, and moved forward, giving DT a chance to get going, and slants inside giving a nice clean lane to deliver the ball. DT is very very fast and Tim against all logic and history delivered the pass magnificently. Additionally, the stiff arm on his single defender REALLY opened up that run.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=azllM3BKFOk

Additionally, the reason I think that coverage was so shitty in this game relies purely on how well KC was on rushing and closing the pocket, not allowing Tebow to have time to do whatever chaos theory crazy ass duke boys bullshit he manages to pull off. Unfortunately the Steelers either don't have the personnel to pull that kind of thing off, or an effective package.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 10, 2012, 10:59:43 AM
Yeah, that overtime TD was all on that safety. He bit WAY too much on the run. He was a good 3-5 yards farther upfield than he should have been. Also, the Steelers pass rush couldn't really do much because their starting NT and one of their starting DE's were on the sidelines injured.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on January 10, 2012, 11:11:31 AM
Hey, what would make this whole Tebow thing more weird?

How about John Parr re-recording his own 1985 No. 1 hit, "St. Elmo's Fire" theme song, with Tebow-centric lyrics.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/john-parr-records-st-elmo-fire-theme-song-190905071.html

 :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 10, 2012, 11:23:56 AM
Call me when he reworks "Naughty, naughty"


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 10, 2012, 11:35:20 AM
Hey, what would make this whole Tebow thing more weird?

How about John Parr re-recording his own 1985 No. 1 hit, "St. Elmo's Fire" theme song, with Tebow-centric lyrics.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/john-parr-records-st-elmo-fire-theme-song-190905071.html

 :uhrr:

 :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh: :argh:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: luckton on January 10, 2012, 11:43:46 AM
We really should just have a "Tebow Bashing" thread.  There's obviously enough angst around here to keep it going for a while  :grin: :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 10, 2012, 11:54:38 AM
This stuff right here is why I keep finding new ways to love American Football. I never understood the deal with spy linebackers, but now I'm feeling quite satisfied.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 10, 2012, 12:12:39 PM
Oakland Raiders fire coach Hue Jackson (http://news.yahoo.com/ap-source-oakland-raiders-fire-coach-hue-jackson-190726347--spt.html)



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on January 10, 2012, 12:17:44 PM
So much for pinning all of your hopes on Carson Palmer.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on January 10, 2012, 12:26:49 PM
One linebacker "spies" on the QB (or another player). Essentially they follow the QB with their eyes until they see what the QB is going to do - will he run (if so, go hit the motherfucker in the jaw) or will he pass (go back in coverage or try to tackle the guy catching the ball) or will he hand the ball off (go tackle the running back). Teams use a spy against someone like Cam Newton or Michael Vick to try to shut down the scramble/run/option part of the equation. Against a guy like Brady or Manning, you don't need one because if that QB is running, your pass rush and/or coverage has done it's job and he likely won't be able to hurt you too bad running the ball.

A spy is also used to cover all purpose yardage guys llike a Sproles or how Brian Westbrook was.  Essentially any player on the field that has a high probability to touch the ball every play which is most often an athletic QB or a RB that can catch (split out) and run.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 10, 2012, 12:31:22 PM
They need a time machine so they can go back and fire him before he trades for Carson Palmer.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on January 10, 2012, 12:35:35 PM
Not really. As I understand it, a linebacker's job is either 1) blitz the QB, 2) move back into coverage, either by covering a specific area of the field (zone coverage) or covering a specific man (man-to-man coverage - this is usually the RB or a TE, but can be a wideout in the slot), 3) fill a gap on the offensive line to keep a running back from busting through a hole. They generally aren't meant to watch the QB except as it relates to pass coverage or blitzing. This is why running QB's can be so dangerous in the NFL - there's nobody really assigned to stop them other than blitzing them and running QB's are very good at evading the pass rush and breaking open 10-20 yard runs. They just aren't usually great passers (see Tim Tebow).

Just to expand on this:

In a traditional 4-3 defense (four defensive linemen, three linebackers) you have three linebackers that are nicknamed WILL (weakside), MIKE (middle), and SAM (strongside).  

The weakside linebacker will typically always line up away from the TE where the strongside will cover the other.  On running downs, the Linebacker's job is to cover the edges to contain on a run play, and in a zone defense sit back in the the zone to disrupt passing lanes in short slants, hooks or curls.  

There are some other newer changes to the NFL with faster offenses where you will have nickel LBs.  Essentially on passing downs you'll either put in a 3rd Safety and have two linebackers, or you'll change out your SAM linebacker for a quicker, more athletic LB to cover TE's or RB's that might go out in a passing route.

The SAM linebacker is usually the guy who calls the defensive plays and is responsible for alignment.  They are responsible for shooting the A and B gaps (A Gap = the hole between the center and guard, and the B gap is the hole between the guard and the tackle) on running downs.  But sometimes they are asked to drop back into pass coverage as well.

Linebackers are very versatile players and must be very athletic.  

In a 3-4 scheme where you have 4 LBs you run on the same principles, but alignment shifts.  You'll most likely see slanting D-Lines to fill both gaps (you might hear how Vince Wilfork of NE is one of the best 2-gap DLinement in the league because he can fill both A gaps as the nose tackle)  Usually the two linebackers on the strong side might line up on the line like a defensive linemen to rush the QB.  Sometimes you can bring both outside linesbacker in for a blitz.

Hope that makes a bit of sense!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on January 10, 2012, 02:51:05 PM
What is a 'Strong side' and 'Weak side'.


I'm not being a shit, I seriously don't know what that means.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 10, 2012, 02:54:59 PM
Well I predict that next year it will be the default, after Tebow wins the super bowl with a drop kick.  :why_so_serious:

I thought the drop kick was no longer allowed in American football.

It's still allowed, it's just no one does it because it's way more trouble than it is worth, especially with how the ball has evolved.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on January 10, 2012, 02:55:35 PM
What is a 'Strong side' and 'Weak side'.


I'm not being a shit, I seriously don't know what that means.

Whatever side has more people on it, counting from the center.  The easy way to tell is in a single tight end set, which side is the tight end on.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 10, 2012, 05:34:55 PM
What is a 'Strong side' and 'Weak side'.


I'm not being a shit, I seriously don't know what that means.

Whatever side has more people on it, counting from the center.  The easy way to tell is in a single tight end set, which side is the tight end on.

Mostly this, though it is a little more nuanced when the team goes with a balanced set (ie a wishbone). In that case the strong side is usually on the side opposite the qb's throwing arm because that is usually the side that gets extra blocking support due to "oh hi, blindside!"



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on January 10, 2012, 06:13:21 PM
What is a 'Strong side' and 'Weak side'.


I'm not being a shit, I seriously don't know what that means.

Read my post again, I explain it.  The strong side is usually the side of the line where the TE lines up.  The weakside is the opposite.  If it's a two TE formation then you're usually in max protect or goal line and then the configuration will probably changed.  But if you have two TE's and not in either of the former formations, the SAM backer will typically cover the more athletic TE, or the more dangerous pass runner.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 11, 2012, 07:37:11 AM
Jaguars Hire Mike Mularkey as Head Coach (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7448807/jacksonville-jaguars-hire-mike-mularkey-coach)

What the...? Why? The Falcons offense was a bit of terrible this year, taking a step back from the previous year's offensive stats (more yards per game, but less points). In most of their losses, they looked terribad, especially the playoffs. And they haven't won a playoff game with him as O-coordinator yet. His previous stint as head coach in Buffalo was mostly a disaster. I guess since it's probably the least desirable job in the NFL right now, he was all they could get?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on January 11, 2012, 07:40:20 AM
Jaguars Hire Mike Mularkey as Head Coach (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7448807/jacksonville-jaguars-hire-mike-mularkey-coach)

Goodness... great clipping there on the floating head, ESPN.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 11, 2012, 07:42:25 AM
Pretty standard knowledge here in Atlanta that both coordinators were told after the Saints game where they got skullfucked that the coaches should look for other jobs. Basically, they were given free reign to find a soft landing.

Did that have an effect on how the Falcons played in the playoffs? Seems more than likely it did.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 11, 2012, 08:08:37 AM
Jaguars Hire Mike Mularkey as Head Coach (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7448807/jacksonville-jaguars-hire-mike-mularkey-coach)

What the...? Why? The Falcons offense was a bit of terrible this year, taking a step back from the previous year's offensive stats (more yards per game, but less points). In most of their losses, they looked terribad, especially the playoffs. And they haven't won a playoff game with him as O-coordinator yet. His previous stint as head coach in Buffalo was mostly a disaster. I guess since it's probably the least desirable job in the NFL right now, he was all they could get?

Shahid Khan wants to make sure the team is in the best position to win the "move to LA" lottery.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on January 11, 2012, 09:46:50 AM
Pretty standard knowledge here in Atlanta that both coordinators were told after the Saints game where they got skullfucked that the coaches should look for other jobs. Basically, they were given free reign to find a soft landing.

Did that have an effect on how the Falcons played in the playoffs? Seems more than likely it did.

One would think that if you were a coach about to be jobless, you would want the last few games you coached - especially playoff games - to be good.  Or else the NFL coaching pool is so small, one's actual success doesn't matter so much since there just aren't a lot of guys to pick from.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 11, 2012, 10:58:21 AM
They were already hired by the playoffs. The contracts were signed. The jobs were literally announced two days after the Falcons fucked up.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on January 11, 2012, 10:15:42 PM
Isn't he the guy with the giant pornstache?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 12, 2012, 06:20:10 AM
http://www.manningface.com/


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 12, 2012, 07:38:25 AM
Eli must have gotten more of mom's genetics because he's a heck of a lot better looking guy than his dad or brother. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 12, 2012, 03:43:55 PM
You really think so? I'd put them both in the same "big, doofy white guy" category. Which isn't necessarily bad, I just think Peyton and Eli look enough alike that it's not even worth considering who is better looking.

Eli has a better "grr, angry puppy!" face, though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 12, 2012, 05:36:05 PM
Nah.  Part of my job is to judge facial esthetics.  Eli may not be a great looking guy, but he's a helluva lot better looking than his brother. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 12, 2012, 08:04:09 PM
Dear diary...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: RhyssaFireheart on January 13, 2012, 05:48:38 AM
It's the nose and hairline.  Eli's are both better than Peyton's.

That Manning Face site is pretty funny though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 13, 2012, 05:55:01 AM
Yeah, the bridge of the nose and hairline are definitely it. That said, Peyton looks like a football player out of the 40s and 50s.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 13, 2012, 07:46:55 AM
Peyton's nose looks like it has been broken about 50 times.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on January 13, 2012, 09:51:57 AM
http://boston.barstoolsports.com/m/random-thoughts/could-tim-tebow-really-just-be-the-antichrist/

I knew it!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 14, 2012, 02:03:49 PM
This is awesome so far.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Velorath on January 14, 2012, 02:11:18 PM
The Niners always make me too nervous to actually enjoy a game while it's being played.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 14, 2012, 03:29:32 PM
STOP THROWING THE BALL NINERS, FUCK!  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 14, 2012, 03:30:43 PM
Jesus Christ Crabtree, your job is to *catch* the ball.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 14, 2012, 03:49:09 PM
This is the dumbest playcalling I've seen by a team with a lead I've seen so far in this playoffs.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on January 14, 2012, 03:51:34 PM
This is the dumbest playcalling I've seen by a team with a lead I've seen so far in this playoffs.

Ill admit I haven't seen many niners games this year, but isn't their big strength supposed to be running and setting up play action?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 14, 2012, 03:53:11 PM
Frank Gore is averaging 4 a carry. If you're not pounding them with your running game until they crumble, I don't know WTF the offensive coordinator is thinking.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 14, 2012, 03:57:19 PM
The Saints give up like 5 yards a carry or something too.

EDIT: And what the hell is with these picks?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 14, 2012, 04:53:57 PM
My god. I will say this, who would have expected the saints to only have 32 points when Brees throws 63 passes?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 14, 2012, 04:55:10 PM
Damn, why O why aren't they showing the Niners game here?  I'm following it on nfl.com and it is EPIC.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on January 14, 2012, 04:57:52 PM
This game has become ridiculous.  :-o


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 14, 2012, 04:59:20 PM
 :drill: :drill: :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 14, 2012, 04:59:37 PM
Christ Almighty.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 14, 2012, 05:01:20 PM
HOLY FUCKING SHIT!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 14, 2012, 05:03:18 PM
This game is giving me an ulcer.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 14, 2012, 05:07:08 PM
I give all credit to the fact that they brought Huey back to sing the national anthem. It was the Power of Love!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 14, 2012, 05:08:22 PM
Frick the game ran way long and I didn't record the end.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on January 14, 2012, 05:08:31 PM
Fucking insane game -  2 minute shoot out and Smith comes out over Brees?  Never would have picked that.  NEVER.  

And yes, I may have teared up more than a little after seeing Vernon Davis break down after that final touchdown.  Football at its best.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 14, 2012, 05:15:44 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/WGtN1.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on January 14, 2012, 05:17:12 PM
One of the greatest endings to a game I've seen.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on January 14, 2012, 05:19:11 PM
The end of that game blew my mind right in front of my face.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 14, 2012, 05:45:49 PM
That game was some superb entertainment. All credit to the 49ers, they came out big when they had to


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on January 14, 2012, 06:37:46 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/WGtN1.jpg)


 :Love_Letters:  That pretty much sums up the first half of the Pats-Denver game. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 14, 2012, 06:54:51 PM
The Patriots just have so many good options on offence. This is some really quite remarkable football to watch.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on January 14, 2012, 07:39:50 PM
Gronk!!!!!!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: luckton on January 14, 2012, 07:40:43 PM
...and on the 8th day, God was all like "Oh dang! That game was TODAY?! Fffffffuuuuuuuuuuuu...."   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on January 14, 2012, 07:54:07 PM
That game was some superb entertainment. All credit to the 49ers, they came out big when they had to

49ers looked like a championship team today.  That A Smith bootleg was awesome.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on January 14, 2012, 08:05:58 PM
So I wonder.

Why was it so saggy?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: luckton on January 15, 2012, 04:27:32 AM
I don't really watch a whole lot of football, but I'm pretty sure I know a massacre when I see one  :why_so_serious: :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 15, 2012, 05:15:05 AM
Hernandez and Gronkowski are just phenomenal.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on January 15, 2012, 06:25:40 AM
I loved checking out the box score and seeing Brady's punt listed. It was the longest punt of the game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 10:03:55 AM
 :ye_gods: what the fuck was that punt returner thinking?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on January 15, 2012, 10:17:16 AM
He wasn't.  First big playoff game, he choked.

So I wonder.

Why was it so saggy?

Was I the only one who heard this last night? No comment makes me wonder if it was a local thing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2012, 10:21:51 AM
What was saggy?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 11:24:32 AM
If it weren't for that bonehead punt returner this game would be a bit  different. Still turning into a decent game tho.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 15, 2012, 11:26:06 AM
Flacco is being Flacco

Also, good lord, the drops by Baltimore on both sides of the ball are atrocious.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on January 15, 2012, 11:28:44 AM
What was saggy?

That's my question.  The audio feed of the Patriots/ Broncos game was interrupted by some woman on her phone.  At first it was an echo in the background "so about the fur coat."  Then about 3-4 seconds after that the commentary cut-out entirely and you could tell she was on the phone.  "Uh huh.  Yeah.  Right, that's why I said it was so saggy."   Then silence for a second before it cut back to the commentary.  Cracked me up.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 11:40:32 AM
My god that punt returner.   :uhrr:  he finally catches one cleanly and runs backwards ten yards.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 15, 2012, 01:24:35 PM
OK, Giants. I'm depending on you to ruin my marriage. DO IT.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 01:39:46 PM
OK, Giants. I'm depending on you to ruin my marriage. DO IT.

Die, rabbit!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2012, 02:02:40 PM
OK, Giants. I'm depending on you to ruin my marriage. DO IT.
Beat the Weenie!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 15, 2012, 02:09:11 PM
Those refs are lucky Coughlin cannot kill them with his mind.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on January 15, 2012, 02:11:27 PM
Those refs are lucky Coughlin cannot kill them with his mind.

I can't understand how he was ruled down, the one view was clear as day.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 02:16:47 PM
Those refs are lucky Coughlin cannot kill them with his mind.

I can't understand how he was ruled down, the one view was clear as day.

Probably because the ball was still on his arm. I will agree it was not a great call.

WHY try an onside kick McCarthy!!!!!!!!????????!!!!!!!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 15, 2012, 02:33:54 PM
What is wrong with the packers recievers tonight?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 02:36:08 PM
What is wrong with the packers recievers tonight?

Just a bit rusty I think as it has been three weeks since they have played with Rodgers .

YES!!!!!! Eli face!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 02:42:16 PM
NOoOo! Don't fumble it there!

I think I am going to die of a heart attack before this is over.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 02:57:54 PM
FuckIng ridiculous. Why the fuck would you call that timeout?!?!?!?!??


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 15, 2012, 03:00:44 PM
On the one hand:  :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real:

On the other: Fuck, there's still a whole 'nother half? I'm going to vomit.  :ye_gods: :ye_gods: :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 15, 2012, 03:01:43 PM
Wow, Hail Mary at the half!  I gotta say, the Pack's offense looks rusty.  But never count them out at the half.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 03:03:10 PM
Wow, Hail Mary at the half!  I gotta say, the Pack's offense looks rusty.  But never count them out at the half.

McCarthy looks like a fucking idiot :mob:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2012, 03:03:38 PM
Tbat play almost never works :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on January 15, 2012, 03:31:31 PM
On the one hand:  :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real:

On the other: Fuck, there's still a whole 'nother half? I'm going to vomit.  :ye_gods: :ye_gods: :ye_gods:

An so it was, the Sjofn summed up being a giants fan.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 03:55:41 PM
Fuckity fuck fuck.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 15, 2012, 03:57:21 PM
4th and 5 on NY's 40 and they go for it?  Why?  The're only one TD behind.  This and the botched onside kick tells me that the Pack are being a little too tricksy for their own good.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on January 15, 2012, 03:59:03 PM
4th and 5 on NY's 40 and they go for it?  Why?  The're only one TD behind.  This and the botched onside kick tells me that the Pack are being a little too tricksy for their own good.


It is one of those situations where the punt has a high potential to only net you 20 yards of field position.  You see teams go for it from there at any point in the game with a fair amount of frequency.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2012, 04:11:14 PM
Another turnover! :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 15, 2012, 04:13:04 PM
holy shit what is going on you guys


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 04:13:31 PM
Another turnover! :drill:


Fuckity fuck fuck.

They need to get rid of the fucking brick and repaint the outside of Lambeau green again. They have been shit there in the playoffs since the renovations.

I am going to go hang myself.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2012, 04:14:35 PM
They need to get rid of the fucking brick and repaint the outside of Lambeau green again. They have been shit there in the playoffs since the renovations.
Yup.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2012, 04:18:02 PM
That was a bullshit personal foul call.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on January 15, 2012, 04:20:11 PM
That was a bullshit personal foul call.


These referees have been pretty bad all day.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 04:22:16 PM
McCarthy made some shitty calls that cost them but the dropped balls and the lack of a decent defensive line are what really killed them.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on January 15, 2012, 04:25:41 PM
Fucking bullshit, that drive should have been over at the fucking 15 yard line.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 15, 2012, 04:26:23 PM
That's twice the Giants have been fucked by the refs, whee!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 04:33:41 PM
Fucking bullshit, that drive should have been over at the fucking 15 yard line.

In the current coddle the quarterback league did you really expect them not to call a penalty? Sure there was not much in the "hit to the head" part but the hit was late and it was from behind and Rodgers needed help getting up.

It was academic anyway as the Fucking brick facade gremlins beat the packers again.

And if the MVP voting has not been done yet, Rodgers just handed it to Brees or Brady on a platter.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 15, 2012, 04:41:23 PM
WELL, now Ingmar and I will spend the week talking shit to each other! Whee!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2012, 04:47:50 PM
It's okay, balance will be restored to the Force after the Niners beat the Giants next week :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 15, 2012, 04:50:04 PM
I'd say to watch it, or the Giants will kill your starting QB again, but would people even notice?  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 15, 2012, 04:53:45 PM
It's okay, balance will be restored to the Force after the Niners beat the Giants next week :why_so_serious:


I'm not so sure.  They're clicking on all cylinders similar to 2008. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2012, 04:54:27 PM
I'd say to watch it, or the Giants will kill your starting QB again, but would people even notice?  :oh_i_see:
Considering that the Niners 2nd and 3rd string QBs are both Rookies...maybe :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 15, 2012, 05:04:17 PM
Why is it every year I hear grumblings for Coughlin's head, the Giants take the trophy?  :why_so_serious:

And thanks NFC, you fucked my weekly picks  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2012, 05:05:28 PM
It's okay, balance will be restored to the Force after the Niners beat the Giants next week :why_so_serious:
I'm not so sure.  They're clicking on all cylinders similar to 2008. 
Oh I agree, that's why I picked them to beat the Packers today.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 15, 2012, 06:01:24 PM
I think the Pats are going to be very tough to beat this year, even with the Giants playing well.  I'm not sure that lightning will strike twice for them.

And wouldn't it be delicious if Eli got another Superbowl ring?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 15, 2012, 06:07:09 PM
Best part of the game?  Eli had an amazing block on Bradshaw's second big run to seal up the defender and let Bradshaw turn the corner.  

I think the Pats are going to be very tough to beat this year, even with the Giants playing well.  I'm not sure that lightning will strike twice for them.

And wouldn't it be delicious if Eli got another Superbowl ring?

It's looking more and more like Pats/Giants, which would be unreal between past history and this year's close game.


Pats should rip up the Ravens, which is fine because the Ravens just don't do anything for me.  I'm pretty happy with either the Niners or the Giants...  Niners just have a great story this year.  Niners/Giants should be a great game, both because the teams are playing well and the tight game earlier this year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2012, 07:03:02 PM
Pats should rip up the Ravens, which is fine because the Ravens just don't do anything for me.
Yeah the Ravens are huge underdogs right now against the Patriots and given how inconsistent Flacco still is it doesn't look good for the Ravens. On other hand the Giants were even bigger underdogs against the Packers and look what happened there :awesome_for_real:

Edit: grammar is hard


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 15, 2012, 07:15:07 PM
This weekend should kill the retarded media narrative of "OH NOES DEFENSE DOESN'T MATTER ANYMORE" that we had to listen to the last few weeks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 15, 2012, 07:28:35 PM
It'll kill it until next season, when they'll start it back up again. I think defense has "died" in football the last couple seasons now.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2012, 07:58:06 PM
It won't stop until the Patriots lose.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 15, 2012, 07:59:41 PM
Ravens v. 49ers in the Superbowl, and it'll be rocking!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 15, 2012, 08:28:28 PM
The "defense is dead" conversation won't stop until they roll back a few of the more ridiculous rules of the last few years like the "tuck rule", the "quarterback takes one step left or right and it can't be intentional grounding", and this new fangled "catch when the ball touches the ground" bullshit.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 15, 2012, 09:36:55 PM
Pats should rip up the Ravens, which is fine because the Ravens just don't do anything for me.
Yeah the Ravens are huge underdogs right now against the Patriots and given how inconsistent Flacco still is it doesn't look good for the Ravens. On other hand the Giants were even bigger underdogs against the Packers and look what happened there :awesome_for_real:

Edit: grammar is hard

Really?  While the Packers were favored, almost everything I heard gave the Giants a legit upset shot if they played well, between the earlier meeting and the Giants performance the last couple of weeks.  The last few days, the media narrative was swinging back the other way as it was being pointed out that too many were picking the Giants to upset the Packers. 

I don't think that anyone picked the Giants to drub the Packers, but no one would have been too surprised if the Giants won in a shootout...  especially since the Packers squeaked by the Giants in the regular season in a shootout.


I just don't see how the Ravens beat the Pats without Tom Brady going down to injury early in the game.  I don't think the Ravens can put the points on the board to keep up, and I don't think their D will slow down the Pats enough. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 15, 2012, 10:03:08 PM
The "defense is dead" conversation won't stop until they roll back a few of the more ridiculous rules of the last few years like the "tuck rule", the "quarterback takes one step left or right and it can't be intentional grounding", and this new fangled "catch when the ball touches the ground" bullshit.

Tch, Eli managed to intentionally ground last week. It's hard, but it still happens!  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 15, 2012, 10:25:17 PM
Pats should rip up the Ravens, which is fine because the Ravens just don't do anything for me.
Yeah the Ravens are huge underdogs right now against the Patriots and given how inconsistent Flacco still is it doesn't look good for the Ravens. On other hand the Giants were even bigger underdogs against the Packers and look what happened there :awesome_for_real:
Edit: grammar is hard
Really?  While the Packers were favored, almost everything I heard gave the Giants a legit upset shot if they played well, between the earlier meeting and the Giants performance the last couple of weeks.  The last few days, the media narrative was swinging back the other way as it was being pointed out that too many were picking the Giants to upset the Packers. 

I don't think that anyone picked the Giants to drub the Packers, but no one would have been too surprised if the Giants won in a shootout...  especially since the Packers squeaked by the Giants in the regular season in a shootout.
Well "huge" might be somewhat of an overstatement but the spread on the Packers / Giants game was Packers -8.5. The current spread on the Patriots / Ravens game is Patriots -7.5.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 16, 2012, 06:00:04 AM
Well "huge" might be somewhat of an overstatement but the spread on the Packers / Giants game was Packers -8.5. The current spread on the Patriots / Ravens game is Patriots -7.5.

Spread is just how the bettors are betting, so it reflects popular bias, and since it's an all or nothing bet spread can end up exaggerating results.  Sports insiders and professionals were so overwhelmingly picking the Giants for the upset that some people were going "whoa, whoa, whoa, hold on...  that's still the GB Packers and Aaron Rodgers out there."

I just don't see how the Ravens can beat the Pats, given their strengths and weaknesses and expecting both to have typical games....  I mean, unless Tom Brady is taken out by a sniper during their first possession, or Welker and Hernandez kill each other in a bloodsport style no holds barred fight tournament the night before (and even then, Gronk would probably have 3 TDs).


Likewise, I think the 49ers are a much, much, much harder matchup for the Giants then the Saints (or even the Pats!).  Like the first matchup, it probably comes down to who makes a mistake.  Should be an amazing football game though!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 16, 2012, 09:19:57 AM
My gut reaction is, why on earth pick Alex over Eli ever? Then I rewatch the highlights of Alex over Drew and think... well there goes that idea.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on January 16, 2012, 09:41:06 AM
Packers looked out of sync, and their offensive line woes came to an apex when pitted against a solid Giant defensive line. Also, Giant receivers have been solid, and made the catches whereas Packer receivers did not. Also, you cannot turn the ball over like the Packers did and expect to win come playoff time.

Ravens fan should be troubled as Texans deserved to win that game and if Houston still had Schaub (or even Leinart), they prevail. A poor display on home turf for Baltimore and I fathom that Patriots monster TEs will have their way with Baltimore defensive backfield and Flacco will meltdown in the big game again.

Missed the 49er-Saint game (which from highlights, looked like the best of the weekend), but the pillaging of Tebow by New England showcases Patriots the class of the playoff field, though anything can happen come next Sunday.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 16, 2012, 09:49:49 AM
My gut reaction is, why on earth pick Alex over Eli ever? Then I rewatch the highlights of Alex over Drew and think... well there goes that idea.

Because it isn't just Alex.  The SF D is good, the special teams are good, and running is good.  SF is a complete team, with an above average QB who is showing increasing moments of brilliance.

The entire Giants team needs to show up and have a good day.  Instead, if they played the Saints, then Eli would need to have a good game and if just one other portion of their team had a good day they could get the win.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 16, 2012, 10:30:16 AM
Fuck, I still feel like shit after that game last night. What an amazing weekend of football, capped off by the biggest turd laid in the middle of Lambeau Field since 2007. Fucking Giants.

Houston just proved to me that my picks for the Super Bowl were all wrong. The Ravens should not have won that game, AT ALL. Two things gave them that game: 1) Jacoby Jones forgot how to field punts and 2) T.J. Yates is not ready to be a starting NFL QB. Yet. I mean, WTF was Jones thinking trying to grab that bouncing punt? It's not like he's got some clear field ahead of him, the defender was within 5 yards and he was inside his own 20. YOU DO NOT TOUCH THAT BALL, EVER. YOU ARE NOT DEVIN FUCKING HESTER. And then he flubs the second kick, and runs backwards for the third. Way to give the Ravens short fields, dickstamp. And yet, the Ravens STILL couldn't put the game away until late. They should have mangled this team, but Flacco was terrible. The Texans' D was good, stopping Ray Rice but when the Ravens just needed a third down conversion, Flacco couldn't step up and make the throws. Of course, neither could Yates which leads me to believe the game would have been different if Schaub had been there (or hell, even Jake Delhomme who was sitting on the bench going, "I could have made that"). Yates did ok, but I felt like the gameplan shackled him a little much. They tried to rely on that naked bootleg too much and the Ravens sniffed it out after the first time. I really think New England is just going to manhandle the Ravens in Foxboro.

I fell asleep and fast forwarded through much of the Pats/Broncos game, especially after the Pats went up 21-0 in the first quarter. Why did it have to be Brady that finally rid me of this troublesome priest quarterback? Brady is on fire, and their defense is doing enough with Flacco playing like shit that I think the Pats win by a TD or more.

San Francisco is a championship caliber team. And frankly, it felt good to see Alex Smith be one of the main reasons they beat the Saints. I normally would root for the Saints, but I wanted to see the Niners win so I could see this team go into Lambeau. I think that would be much more interesting game than the game we're going to get. Give the Niners all the credit in the world. Their defense was knocking motherfuckers out. Their offense didn't turn the ball over, and Smith actually made some plays with his arms AND legs. That bootleg was just amazing, but the catches Vernon Davis made to seal the game - that's what makes watching football so rewarding. Especially when you see the emotion on that man's face when he reailzes just what he's done. After all the shit the Niners team has put their fans through the last decade, it's a great feel good story.

Oh my God, Green Bay, what the fuck? I can't honestly say the fuckups they made were down to 3-week layoff rust. They just played BAD. Not ordinary, BAD. REALLY BAD. 8 dropped passes? That's like 3 games worth of dropped passes for this team normally. Rodgers just flat out MISSED two or three really big pass plays (one to Jennings, one to Finley and I think one more). And then the fumbles, something I have no fucking explanation for. The fumbles weren't even necessarily good hits, guys just could not hold on to the ball. I have no explanation. But the worst part was how bad their pass coverage was. 75% of the passes Manning completed were to a guy with NOBODY within 5 yards of him. The amount of times guys just flat blew coverage was sickening. It's not like the Giants were even doing such elaborate things, the Packers corners and safeties just didn't seem to know who to cover or what their roles were. You can't give Eli that many open looks, he will eat you alive throwing to your grandmother, much less NFL caliber receivers. I don't think the Giants defense played all that great, either. They got SOME pressure on Rodgers, causing him to run, but in a game where the Packers are clicking, Rodgers makes those passes and the recievers make the catches. And what the fuck was McCarthy thinking with that first onside kick? Probably thinking, "My defense can't fucking cover a paraplegic, better give it back to Rodgers!" The worst performance the Packers have had in over a year. One of the reasons Lambeau used to be such a fortress was that Favre got BETTER when the temperature got colder. Rodgers doesn't seem to have that quality, at least not yet.

So the real marquee matchup next Sunday is again the NFC Championship, which I'm looking more forward to than any potential Super Bowl matchup of the teams we have left. I have to root for the Niners now, because I really like the way they are playing. The Ravens should be better, but aren't. I think San Fran can find a way to slow Brady down enough for their offense to win. But those goddamn Giants... they really do play the best when it looks like they are destined to lose. I'm really starting to hate them.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on January 17, 2012, 08:02:50 AM
The Pats using the TE from the backfield was pure gold.  Plus using the no huddle on the first drive.  Good ideas by the coaches to twist things up. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 17, 2012, 12:06:12 PM
Jim Caldwell gone (http://blogs.colts.com/2012/01/17/the-indianapolis-colts-release-jim-caldwell/)



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 17, 2012, 12:12:10 PM
Took them long enough.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on January 17, 2012, 12:15:36 PM
(http://i2.cdn.turner.com/si/2012/football/nfl/01/17/jim.caldwell.ap/jim-caldwell.jpg)

In this picture, Jim Caldwell is:

a) Ecstatic
b) Concerned
c) Concealing a small bird in his hands.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 17, 2012, 12:18:53 PM
I've never seen him so excited!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 17, 2012, 03:15:25 PM
Irsay is an anti-Vulcanite.  There I said it!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 22, 2012, 03:02:25 PM
Why the hell would you pass for the end zone on two straight downs when you were second and one with almost a minute left?

That kicker is getting a pink slip methinks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 22, 2012, 03:05:02 PM
What a terrible way to lose a game; I feel really sorry for Rice and the others who played a solid game. That kicker has to go.

I'm happy the Pats. won, because I think in general they are the better team. The O needs to step up a bit, although I thought the D had a good game.

Also I thought Gronk was done after that hit  :ye_gods:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on January 22, 2012, 03:18:09 PM
Flacco lost that game.  When he was flushed to the right , he only had to scamper and slide 2 yards to get 1st and goal.  Then pound it in with Rice and the Ravens go to the Super Bowl. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ruvaldt on January 22, 2012, 03:21:52 PM
What a terrible way to lose a game; I feel really sorry for Rice and the others who played a solid game. That kicker has to go.

They had a ton of opportunities to get the ball into the endzone.  It's not the kicker's fault that the Ravens' offense wasn't able to score with that many downs at the red zone.  Sure, Cundiff probably should have made the kick, but he also shouldn't have had to even try.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 22, 2012, 03:39:55 PM
Flacco lost that game.  When he was flushed to the right , he only had to scamper and slide 2 yards to get 1st and goal.  Then pound it in with Rice and the Ravens go to the Super Bowl. 

The kicker sure didn't help much.   :grin:

What a game!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Zetleft on January 22, 2012, 03:42:33 PM
Cundif isn't even a Cowboy anymore but still finds a way to piss me off.   So sick of the pats.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on January 22, 2012, 03:43:06 PM
So. Many. Ace ventura references on Facebook.

"Laces Out!"  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on January 22, 2012, 03:43:16 PM
Probably should have made that kick?  PROBABLY?  It's 32 fucking yards out, it's a god damn extra point.  And step off Flacco - he hit Evans square in the hands, and he fucking gets butter fingers and drops it in the endzone.  Flacco played a fine game - receivers have to step up and hold on to the damn ball when it hits them in both hands.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on January 22, 2012, 04:45:39 PM
I'd like to apologize to any Ravens fans, as Cundiff was my fantasy kicker this year and clearly still had some of the stink left on him come today.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 22, 2012, 04:59:30 PM
I can't take another half arghghghgh


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 22, 2012, 05:00:32 PM
Who knew Flacco would not be the one to lose the game for them?  Ravens did a good job, even took the lead, but the Pats just get the breaks.  Was funny to see Tom Brady admit he sucked.

The Niners/Giants game is good stuff.  Just tough football with some big plays.  Eli is an elite QB and the Giants are hustling around.  Damn can Cruz play some ball!  The Niners are solid and I really like the tough running of Frank Gore.

 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on January 22, 2012, 06:00:28 PM
Ravens win that game if the receiver doesn't drop the ball in the end zone.  Kicker should have never had to have been in the position to kick more than an extra point.

Fucking Patriots.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 22, 2012, 06:08:51 PM
That hit his kneeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee graaaaaaaah

Ahem.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 22, 2012, 06:09:26 PM
What the fuck is with punt returners hanging around a ball that has bounced?

 :uhrr:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 22, 2012, 06:20:11 PM
Manning to Manningham for a hard won TD.  Giants O vs. Niners D is the battle tonight for me.  How many playmakers do the Giants farkin' HAVE?



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 22, 2012, 06:39:29 PM
Man, the 49ers defense was sort of meh in the first half, but they've been pretty damn good in the second half.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 22, 2012, 06:40:02 PM
That was a bullshit telegraphed whistle there.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 22, 2012, 06:56:29 PM
What the fuck is with punt returners hanging around a ball that has bounced?

 :uhrr:

Our regular returner is out, Ginn wouldn't make that error probably.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 22, 2012, 06:58:53 PM
These overtime rules are stupid. Just make it a ten minute overtime period and no sudden death or do it like high school and college where you trade possessions.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 22, 2012, 07:02:15 PM
I like the new OT rules, but not poor Ed having to recite them before the coin toss.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 22, 2012, 07:08:18 PM
The niners offense just doesn't seem to have it in the last half of this game. Smith has missed a bunch of throws by a mile.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 22, 2012, 07:16:02 PM
What the fuck is with punt returners hanging around a ball that has bounced?

 :uhrr:

Our regular returner is out, Ginn wouldn't make that error probably.

 :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on January 22, 2012, 07:17:06 PM
What the fuck is with punt returners hanging around a ball that has bounced?

 :uhrr:

Our regular returner is out, Ginn wouldn't make that error probably.

Yeah, Ginn would have already been running out of bounds.

Edit: way to single-handedly lose the game, replacement punt return guy.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 22, 2012, 07:22:39 PM
Kee-rist.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 22, 2012, 07:23:52 PM
Oh joy a rematch of the last Patriots/Giants Super Bowl .

 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 22, 2012, 07:25:29 PM
Hope it ends like the other one.  :oh_i_see:

I knew it would be Patriots/Giants when Paelos said it would be Ravens/49ers.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Margalis on January 22, 2012, 08:21:08 PM
The 49ers should probably have stopped calling the "roll Alex Smith out to the right and have him throw the ball into the dirt 7 yards in front of the receiver" play.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on January 22, 2012, 08:24:18 PM
But that's vintage Alex Smith!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 22, 2012, 08:29:58 PM
Hope it ends like the other one.  :oh_i_see:

I knew it would be Patriots/Giants when Paelos said it would be Ravens/49ers.  :why_so_serious:

Well, you're boned, because I have $20 riding if the Pats lose.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 22, 2012, 08:34:06 PM
Fuck!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on January 22, 2012, 08:43:20 PM
"I used to be an NFL Punt Returner, until I took a football in the knee (and fumbled in OT)"

Crazy defense on both sides for the last 20 minutes of that game. Outcome sucks, but I guess that's what happens when I do weird shit like root for the 'niners.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on January 22, 2012, 09:05:32 PM
The 49ers should probably have stopped calling the "roll Alex Smith out to the right and have him throw the ball into the dirt 7 yards in front of the receiver" play.

A better call would have been not even keeping a punt returner back…

And, FUCK THE RAVENS EVERMORE!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 23, 2012, 07:07:42 AM
Did anyone listen to Bob Kraft in the Pats post game award ceremony?  Man that motherfucker was drunk.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on January 23, 2012, 07:51:32 AM
Special teams, though often overlooked, decides many otherwise evenly matched games.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 23, 2012, 09:41:32 AM
Christ, another fucking Giants/Pats Super Bowl. Eli has the chance to one-up his brother by winning a second Super Bowl. The 49ers actually miss Ted Ginn, Jr. and not with a high-powered rifle. Michael Crabtree spends an entire game holding out. Alex Smith channels Bill Murray and spends most of the game trying to kill groundhogs with the football. Punt returners really are important. The Ravens defense is still great, but it can't kick field goals, catch touchdown passes placed directly on the hands or convert 3rd and 1's. Joe Flacco doesn't lose the game for the Ravens but they still can't win with him. Billy Cundiff goes to sit on the bench with Mike Vanderjadt and Scott Norwood.

AND WE'RE STUCK WITH PATRIOTS/GIANTS. FUCK YOU, FOOTBALL GODS! RIGHT IN THE EARHOLE!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on January 23, 2012, 09:42:27 AM
Ravens/Niners would have been dreadful to watch.  It would have been like Steelers/Seahawks with a QB winning a SB with a single digit rating.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 23, 2012, 09:57:52 AM
Ravens/Niners would have been dreadful to watch.  It would have been like Steelers/Seahawks with a QB winning a SB with a single digit rating.

Don't care. At least it wouldn't be the northeastern creamy-pants debacle we're going to get from all the network fuckheads over this game.

I'm saying it right now, I'm not watching it. I can't stand either team.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on January 23, 2012, 10:14:41 AM
Not a fan of the Giants but I definitely want them to beat the Patriots again. Belichick is an asshole and a cheat and even though I like Tom Brady cause he's a local boy TERRY AND JOE ARE THE ONLY QBS THAT CAN HAVE 4 SUPER BOWL WINS :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: JWIV on January 23, 2012, 10:28:34 AM
Ravens/Niners would have been dreadful to watch.  It would have been like Steelers/Seahawks with a QB winning a SB with a single digit rating.

It wouldn't have been that bad - the Thanksgiving game was awesome to watch.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on January 23, 2012, 08:39:50 PM
Did Giants Strategically Concuss Kyle Williams? (http://nymag.com/daily/sports/2012/01/did-giants-strategically-concuss-kyle-williams.html)

Quote
The Giants' win over the 49ers in a magnificent throwback conference championship game at Candlestick Park yesterday turned on two fumbles by 49ers punt returner Kyle Williams, an obscure second-year player. That made Kyle Williams personally responsible for ten points in a game that ended 20-17. And the Giants, interviewed in the happy haze of the winning locker room, casually noted a provocative element of their game plan: They'd targeted Williams for extra violence because they knew he had suffered several concussions in the past, and they think it worked.

After the game, reporters crowded around the locker of Jacquian Williams, who'd forced the second fumble, hoping for an angle: Had the Giants noticed something about Kyle Williams's technique, some weakness in the 49ers punt-return scheme? "Nah," Williams said. "The thing is, we knew he had four concussions, so that was our biggest thing, was to take him outta the game."

Devin Thomas, the reserve wide receiver who recovered both of Kyle Williams's fumbles, was even more explicit. “He’s had a lot of concussions," Thomas told the Star-Ledger columnist Steve Politi. "We were just like, ‘We gotta put a hit on that guy.’ ... [Giants reserve safety Tyler] Sash did a great job hitting him early and he looked kind of dazed when he got up. I feel like that made a difference and he coughed it up.”

It certainly sounds like the Giants' special teams players were told about Williams's history of concussions, and that they went after him because of it. (That this has so far drawn no attention from beat reporters suggests that such planning is commonplace). It's impossible to know whether Thomas is right — if Williams in fact was concussed or woozy during the game — but he didn't look himself yesterday: There was the third-quarter punt that skimmed off his knee after he seemed to dawdle, unsure whether to pick it up or let it roll, and at least two punts that he fair-caught though he had plenty of room to run. Sports Illustrated's Ann Killion also noticed "a fumble on a reverse that he fell on, a strange sideways diving catch on another punt that could have been disaster." Williams played virtually the whole game at wide receiver and didn't register a single catch.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 24, 2012, 10:22:51 AM
Not a fan of the Giants but I definitely want them to beat the Patriots again. Belichick is an asshole and a cheat and even though I like Tom Brady cause he's a local boy TERRY AND JOE ARE THE ONLY QBS THAT CAN HAVE 4 SUPER BOWL WINS :why_so_serious:


Plus it would be awesome to see Eli upstage his brother.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 24, 2012, 11:15:06 AM
Put Peyton or Eli on the same team, and tell me who you're starting.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on January 24, 2012, 11:18:35 AM
Well with his neck, I'm not starting Peyton right now.   Plus, he's gotta be a little rusty.   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 24, 2012, 11:22:51 AM
My point being that Eli's success has nothing to do with Eli and everything to do with his team. QBs like that are no gamechangers, where Peyton absolutely is a game-changer.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on January 24, 2012, 11:24:51 AM
Have you been watching football this year?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 24, 2012, 11:30:44 AM
Eli is money in the fourth quarter.  I dispute your statement, Paelos. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 24, 2012, 11:33:05 AM
A lot of it, yeah. Quarterbacks got a lot of OMG LALALALA AWESOME YEAR OF THE QB.

That is until the top two in the NFL got run out of the playoffs after it turned out they couldn't play D.

Eli is on a top 10 passing team that survived on explosive plays and great defensive play with tons of sacks and turnovers. He's a good QB, but I could put Matt Stafford or Cam Newton on that team and they don't miss a beat. His biggest quality is he's slippery.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 24, 2012, 11:36:37 AM
I'm actually going to stick up for Eli on this one. He's been the driving force behind that team this year. They had NO running game most of the year. Manningham, Nicks and Cruz have ALL missed time with injuries, and only Cruz has really be consistently good all year. Eli still throws more INT's than I'd be comfortable with, but I don't think he's interchangeable. And Stafford and Newton? You put either of those guys on a shitty team and they'll make that team better. Your point would be more appropriate if you'd said Rex Grossman instead.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 24, 2012, 11:46:12 AM
Rex Grossman isn't good, though.

Eli is a good QB, but his team is what's getting the job done. He's not the driving force in the playoffs, the D is by far.

They are +5 in turnover margin. They are holding teams to 28% on 3rd downs. They've stopped all four 4th down conversion attempts. Do you realize how ridiculous that rate is on defense in the playoffs against the best talent?? Very few teams hold to that low of a 3rd and 4th down rates in the playoffs in history.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 24, 2012, 11:55:47 AM
Let's see.  The Giants have scored 9 touchdowns in the post season, of which only one is on the ground.  Eli has thrown one interception in this year's postseason.  That's pretty goddamned good.  In fact, it's spectacular.  The only real knock on him is that he's taken 8 sacks.  And it's silly to say that it's because of their defense.  You don't win championships without a decent defense.  

And for the other Manning brother:

I have to say that the Colts would be nuts to pick up a $28 million option on Peyton (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7496925/peyton-manning-talks-indianapolis-colts-changes-uncertain-future) right now.  Sure, it may come back and burn them, but neck injuries can lead to early retirement...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 24, 2012, 12:38:20 PM
Ahem:

1st passing TD - Giants run for 55 yards, Eli makes 4 passes for 18 yards, a 4y one for a TD.
2nd TD - Eli dumps the ball shot to Nicks on a 4 yard pass, defender falls on his fucking face. Nicks goes 72 yards for the TD.
3rd TD - Eli goes deep to Manningham for 27 yards on a passing possession. This was a great series and his best of the game, killed the Falcs for good.
4th TD - Eli goes deep to Nicks for 50+ because Green Bay blows coverage. Good toss, easy TD.
5th TD - HAIL MARY. You saw it, you know it was hilariously bad on GB's part just as much as it was a good play. Still, Eli gets credit.
6th TD - Defense forces the fumble and gets the ball at the 4. Eli throws a 4 yard TD. All defense there.
7th TD - Great drive, good TD on a 6 yard pass. Solid Eli Offensive drive to tie it.
8th TD - Came off a muffed punt. Still, Eli made a redonkulous throw right over the middle in a tight spot.

Here's what seems to get glossed over about that 4th quarter. Other than that awesome throw to take the lead, there were still over 8 minutes left on the clock. What happened then? Eli passes 3 times, has to punt. Gets the ball again, sacked, 2 passes, has to punt. Gets the ball AGAIN. He still can't get them in FG range and has to punt. I mean at what point do you say to yourself, man I wish it was Aaron Rodgers with the ball because it's not going to OT.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 24, 2012, 12:48:44 PM
And he managed to have that stuff happen and still win against the fourth best defense in the league.   :awesome_for_real:

Also, during all this talk about how he's not carrying the team (that it was the defense or the spectacular running game) it was glossed over that the Giants had the 27th best defense in the NFL this year.  Only 5 better than the illustrious Green Bay Packers.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on January 24, 2012, 12:52:34 PM
Paelos the retarded Cowboy in you is showing again.  

I'm happy to see you're not bitter still.

 :awesome_for_real:

edit: I mean you can't really be serious right?  Eli has the most 4th quarter TDs in NFL history.  Eli has the 6th highest passing yards in a single season (I think).  Eli has the most road wins in the post season.. ever.  Eli made an undrafted 2nd year WR into one of the league's elite. 

edit2:  You're probably trolling.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 24, 2012, 01:06:05 PM
Ahem:

1st passing TD - Giants run for 55 yards, Eli makes 4 passes for 18 yards, a 4y one for a TD.
2nd TD - Eli dumps the ball shot to Nicks on a 4 yard pass, defender falls on his fucking face. Nicks goes 72 yards for the TD.
3rd TD - Eli goes deep to Manningham for 27 yards on a passing possession. This was a great series and his best of the game, killed the Falcs for good.
4th TD - Eli goes deep to Nicks for 50+ because Green Bay blows coverage. Good toss, easy TD.
5th TD - HAIL MARY. You saw it, you know it was hilariously bad on GB's part just as much as it was a good play. Still, Eli gets credit.
6th TD - Defense forces the fumble and gets the ball at the 4. Eli throws a 4 yard TD. All defense there.
7th TD - Great drive, good TD on a 6 yard pass. Solid Eli Offensive drive to tie it.
8th TD - Came off a muffed punt. Still, Eli made a redonkulous throw right over the middle in a tight spot.

Here's what seems to get glossed over about that 4th quarter. Other than that awesome throw to take the lead, there were still over 8 minutes left on the clock. What happened then? Eli passes 3 times, has to punt. Gets the ball again, sacked, 2 passes, has to punt. Gets the ball AGAIN. He still can't get them in FG range and has to punt. I mean at what point do you say to yourself, man I wish it was Aaron Rodgers with the ball because it's not going to OT.

Seriously monkey, this is why no one likes Cowboys fans.   :grin:

Throughout the regular season, mostly due to injuries, the Giants had one of the worst defenses in the league (as ghost pointed out), the running game was inconsistent, and the WR corps was untested and injured for most of the season.  The fact the Giants performed as well as they did rests pretty squarely on Eli's shoulders... and that schedule was a fucking nightmare where one of the "easy" matchups was the Cowboys.  

Yes, the playoff resurgence is due in large part to the WR/Defense getting healthy and pulling together, and no Eli isn't a top 2/3 QB....  But you are seriously underestimating how much their success was entirely on Eli.  I mean, in shootouts, he beat Brady and gave Rodgers a scare.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 24, 2012, 01:22:06 PM
no Eli isn't a top 2/3 QB....

But he probably is a top 4-6 QB.  Seriously, in this list of top performers (http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/seasontype/2) I can't think of anyone other than Brees, Rodgers and Brady that I'd take ahead of him. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on January 24, 2012, 01:25:18 PM
I'd take Stafford (on potential), Schaub (physical gifts), and Roethlessberger (drive) over Eli.  Eli is a solid QB.  I just don't think he's an elite QB.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 24, 2012, 01:26:12 PM
Here's what seems to get glossed over about that 4th quarter. Other than that awesome throw to take the lead, there were still over 8 minutes left on the clock. What happened then? Eli passes 3 times, has to punt. Gets the ball again, sacked, 2 passes, has to punt. Gets the ball AGAIN. He still can't get them in FG range and has to punt. I mean at what point do you say to yourself, man I wish it was Aaron Rodgers with the ball because it's not going to OT.

I'm not sure Rodgers would have done any better. The 49ers defense is THAT DAMN GOOD. They were also at the top of the league in takeaways, yet Manning threw no picks. He wasn't particularly effective in the 4th quarter, but did you see the man's jersey? He was getting pummeled all game. He got sacked 6 times and hit 12 times - that's 18 QB hits in a game... and yet he didn't turn the ball over. And threw 2 TD's. He wasn't the reason they won (you are right it was defense and special teams) but those 2 TD's meant something. And 9 TD's to 1 INT in the playoffs? The three defenses he played against in the playoffs were the Falcons (#10 in INT's), the Packers (#1 in INT's) and the 49ers (tied for #2 in INT's). He has been better than good in the playoffs. The only game he didn't have over a 100 quarterback rating was against the #4 defense in the NFL, the 49ers.

Maybe that ain't Hall of Fame, but it's better than good.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 24, 2012, 01:33:07 PM
Regardless of stats and numbers and stuff... there is just something about Eli I just can't get all warrior'd up with on game day. He just seems much more baseball than football for whatever reason.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 24, 2012, 01:36:31 PM
no Eli isn't a top 2/3 QB....

But he probably is a top 4-6 QB.  Seriously, in this list of top performers (http://espn.go.com/nfl/statistics/player/_/stat/passing/sort/quarterbackRating/seasontype/2) I can't think of anyone other than Brees, Rodgers and Brady that I'd take ahead of him. 

I have him at #5, assuming Big Bro recovers...  and a big gap between the top 4 and him.

I'd take Stafford (on potential), Schaub (physical gifts), and Roethlessberger (drive) over Eli.  Eli is a solid QB.  I just don't think he's an elite QB.

Essentially, you are flat out gambling with two of those picks and not even getting good odds.  You should take an established top 10 QB (to be conservative) over a prospect every day of the week.

I would not take Ben over Eli, though I thought about it for a while.  Ben is a solid QB, but he's played most of his career with a great defense.  I would take Eli over Ben solely because, all else being equal, Eli has proven to be a great clutch/fourth quarter QB.  


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on January 24, 2012, 01:39:42 PM
You should take an established top 10 QB (to be conservative) over a prospect every day of the week.

I should, but having played the game at a high level I'd much prefer someone with a huge upside over someone that has peaked.  Particularly if that someone is at a skill/leadership position.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 24, 2012, 01:49:22 PM
I'd take Stafford (on potential), Schaub (physical gifts), and Roethlessberger (drive) over Eli.  Eli is a solid QB.  I just don't think he's an elite QB.



Yet Roethlisberger is the only one that has done shit so far.  Stafford's got a trick shoulder, too, so I think you have to take that into consideration.  And no way I'm taking Schaub with the injury issue.  


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on January 24, 2012, 01:56:09 PM
Good point on the injury angle.  I hadn't considered that in my equation.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 24, 2012, 02:18:50 PM
Stafford survived a 16-game season this year with an extra playoff game. So there's that. Oh and he had almost no running game to speak of.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 24, 2012, 02:23:40 PM
FWIW Eli got away with 2 interceptions that the 49ers managed to mess up by crashing into each other.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on January 24, 2012, 02:24:13 PM
FWIW Eli got away with 2 interceptions that the 49ers managed to mess up by crashing into each other.


Got away with, or PLANNED?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on January 24, 2012, 02:27:10 PM
FWIW Eli got away with 2 interceptions that the 49ers managed to mess up by crashing into each other.

A defensive back is just a wide receiver that can't catch.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 24, 2012, 02:28:40 PM
Stafford is an interesting case.  He's obviously got the potential to be really, really good.  I'm always a little skittish of these guys once they get injured though, because things never really seem to heal back to 100%.  And he plays for the Lions, who could fuck up a wet dream.   :ye_gods:  I do think that if you had the chance to trade Manning for Stafford that you should do it, but it won't come up because the Lions aren't nuts.  The potential is all there.  I do think that Manning is grossly underrated.  Hell, he should go down as an all time great if he beats the Pats a second time.  There aren't a whole lot of QBs with multiple superbowl wins.  He's at least as good as Jim Plunkett.   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 24, 2012, 02:30:32 PM
FWIW Eli got away with 2 interceptions that the 49ers managed to mess up by crashing into each other.

A defensive back is just a wide receiver that can't catch.  :why_so_serious:

Fix't!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on January 24, 2012, 02:37:19 PM
That was implied.  :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on January 24, 2012, 02:37:51 PM
A defensive back is just a wide receiver that can't catch.

I know that you're joking, but we defensive backs saw it this way: A defensive back has the brains to know what to do while a WR has to be told.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on January 24, 2012, 02:59:33 PM
I was an offensive lineman.  Hurr durr, hit the guy what is in front of me.  :drill:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 24, 2012, 03:19:09 PM
Nobody here is going to hear me say Eli's not a top 10 QB. He's good. He's not great. He's Matt Ryan with a better deep ball. Matty Ice is also a top 10 QB with I think better overall mechanics, but he wilts when the pressure comes so he's a failure.

I think my main problem with Eli is he's so inconsistent, and then in the playoffs the team dynamic shifts and he shifts along with it. I mean this is a guy who played absolutely abymsally against a very bad Washington team twice in the regular season, but goes for 350+ on the Cowboys when it mattered. He can throw 3 picks in Seattle and lose, or throw 4 TDs in Philly and win.

There's something about him that just frustrates the hell out of people because you want to put him in elite QB status with his wins, but you can't bring yourself to do it. I think it's his stupid face.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 24, 2012, 04:05:57 PM
Nobody here is going to hear me say Eli's not a top 10 QB. He's good. He's not great. He's Matt Ryan with a better deep ball. Matty Ice is also a top 10 QB with I think better overall mechanics, but he wilts when the pressure comes so he's a failure.

I think my main problem with Eli is he's so inconsistent, and then in the playoffs the team dynamic shifts and he shifts along with it. I mean this is a guy who played absolutely abymsally against a very bad Washington team twice in the regular season, but goes for 350+ on the Cowboys when it mattered. He can throw 3 picks in Seattle and lose, or throw 4 TDs in Philly and win.

There's something about him that just frustrates the hell out of people because you want to put him in elite QB status with his wins, but you can't bring yourself to do it. I think it's his stupid face.

Now that is a well reasoned and hard to argue against post.  To return the favor, I think Romo has huge potential but I just don't see enough Cowboys games to know what's going wrong there....  if it's locker room, players, or management, he should be winning many more games than he is.


I don't think Eli was the inconsistent part of the Giants this year... I think it was the rest of the team.  The running game could be adequate or awful, the blocking is the same, and the defense was so injured they were misfiring most of the year.  That left Eli to carry the load, which is why the Giants had so many 4th Quarter nailbiters.  Also, if you swapped the Giants schedule with a couple of other teams, they wouldn't have been a 9-7 team.  The Redskins loss was inexcusable, but the weaker (record wise) teams they played were the Eagles and the Cowboys... on paper, they were supposed to be pretty good units this year.

Eli doesn't help his cause because he's a complete fucking cipher.  You don't know if he's excited, hurt, scared, tired or whatever... he just looks like you should keep him away from your pet rabbits.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 24, 2012, 04:36:28 PM
Regardless of stats and numbers and stuff... there is just something about Eli I just can't get all warrior'd up with on game day. He just seems much more baseball than football for whatever reason.

It's partly because Eli himself doesn't really "warrior up." Eli is just Eli. He can be fantastic, he can have the worst game ever, at his core, he's always just ... Eli. It's actually something I like about him, he'll have a shittastic game and he doesn't let it bother him, and he never gets so amped up that he fucks up due to OMG U GUIZ I'M IN TEH SUPERBOWL or whatever. But it makes it hard to get excited about him, too.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 24, 2012, 04:42:45 PM
He's like the only guy on the team that wasn't hurt at some point this year. That's really the only reason the Giants didn't have a better record, too many injuries.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 24, 2012, 05:12:50 PM
He's like the only guy on the team that wasn't hurt at some point this year. That's really the only reason the Giants didn't have a better record, too many injuries.

Hmm.  Ingmar defending Eli after the Niners lost?  You lost a bet with Sjofn on the game, and now have to defend Eli the next year, don't you?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 24, 2012, 07:25:15 PM
but goes for 350+ on the Cowboys when it mattered


And now we get to the meat of Paelos's issue.... :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 24, 2012, 08:22:49 PM
but goes for 350+ on the Cowboys when it mattered


And now we get to the meat of Paelos's issue.... :grin:

He plays for the Giants. I hate the Giants. That doesn't mean I don't respect what they do.

Victor Cruz has been a breakout star for them, and JPP is probably the most dynamic pass-rusher I've seen all season. I just can't get behind Eli for the reasons I stated. He's just so meh.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on January 24, 2012, 09:24:23 PM
Why hate on the Giants? There seem to be so many more worthy hate targets in the NFL.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 24, 2012, 09:28:29 PM
Like the Cowboys.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 25, 2012, 12:05:49 AM
Why hate on the Giants? There seem to be so many more worthy hate targets in the NFL.

He hates the Giants because they're in the same division, and lately the Giants have had a pretty good streak of making Cowboys fans miserable one way or another.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 25, 2012, 06:09:04 AM
You know, Romo versus Eli is actually a decent comparison.  They are both wildly inconsistent, moving from high highs to the lowest of lows, yet one has a superbowl ring and has gone to two superbowls yet one has dated Jessica Simpson and a slew of other hot chicks.  It's a trade off, I suppose.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 25, 2012, 06:11:13 AM
Why hate on the Giants? There seem to be so many more worthy hate targets in the NFL.

He hates the Giants because they're in the same division, and lately the Giants have had a pretty good streak of making Cowboys fans miserable one way or another.  :why_so_serious:

Couple that with the fact our QB is a mental midget and our Owner likes to play armchair GM, and my team belongs on the Biggest Loser rather than a football field.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on January 25, 2012, 07:06:39 AM
Couple that with the fact our QB is a mental midget and our Owner likes to play armchair GM, and my team belongs on the Biggest Loser rather than a football field.

At least you get to watch the fail on the biggest TV in the world.  That has value.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 25, 2012, 07:08:57 AM
Dallas teams in general seem to be about coddling the fans more than winning. The Mavericks are the only ones who didn't trip on their dicks.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on January 25, 2012, 01:36:00 PM
Meh, you sound spoiled, it wasn't THAT long ago that Dallas was winning like every other Superbowl it felt like.


Come back to me when you have a 40 year dry spell  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on January 25, 2012, 02:17:29 PM
Come back to me when you have a 40 year dry spell  :why_so_serious:

I'm a Vikings fan.  Don't even mention the Super Bowl, please.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 25, 2012, 02:20:20 PM
Who are the Vikings?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 25, 2012, 02:20:45 PM
Who are the Vikings?


They run a party boat franchise.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 25, 2012, 02:33:23 PM
They're that new Los Angeles expansion team.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 25, 2012, 02:39:20 PM
Meh, you sound spoiled, it wasn't THAT long ago that Dallas was winning like every other Superbowl it felt like.


Come back to me when you have a 40 year dry spell  :why_so_serious:

Can we talk then?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 25, 2012, 03:01:08 PM
Don't mind Fordel, he's a Leafs fan. And a Dolphins fan, from his rebellious Canadian youth. "I'll show these hockey-loving hosers! I'm going to follow AMERICAN FOOTBALL."


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on January 25, 2012, 05:57:34 PM
As a Lions fan....................


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 25, 2012, 06:41:54 PM
<-- Browns fan - I think we all need to meet up and have a few drinks to calm the storm.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on January 25, 2012, 08:55:27 PM
Don't mind Fordel, he's a Leafs fan. And a Dolphins fan, from his rebellious Canadian youth. "I'll show these hockey-loving hosers! I'm going to follow AMERICAN FOOTBALL."


I had this huge Teal Dolphins Coat for winter, with the inside lining being the Dolphin Orange, it was obnoxious and I loved it so much. I have no idea where my parents bought it, as you can imagine, Miami Dolphin gear isn't exactly the most common thing in Toronto  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 26, 2012, 06:25:33 AM
Something that slipped under the radar a few days back; The Rams have signed up to play in the London preseason game for the next three years. (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7482739/st-louis-rams-play-london-games-next-3-years)

The NFL has been growing this annual Wembly game quite a bit over the past 5-6 years or so, and they're supposed to be going to two games a year here in the near future. I will admit that quite a few of us here are interested in the notion of a NFL franchise. Given that the Rams, Jags and Chargers all seem to be franchises with limited shelf-lives, and the financial incentives to grow the league outside of the US, this doesn't seem too ridiculous, does it?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 26, 2012, 06:33:54 AM
Something that slipped under the radar a few days back; The Rams have signed up to play in the London preseason game for the next three years. (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7482739/st-louis-rams-play-london-games-next-3-years)

The NFL has been growing this annual Wembly game quite a bit over the past 5-6 years or so, and they're supposed to be going to two games a year here in the near future. I will admit that quite a few of us here are interested in the notion of a NFL franchise. Given that the Rams, Jags and Chargers all seem to be franchises with limited shelf-lives, and the financial incentives to grow the league outside of the US, this doesn't seem too ridiculous, does it?

I pity the division that gets a team in Great Britain.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 26, 2012, 06:36:57 AM
While the Wembly games are cool and all, I don't think they are going to move a team out of North America permanently.

There are rumors of Goddell thinking about having the SuperBowl in Wembley in the future. Seeing as he got everyone to agree to having one in New York, it is entirely possible too.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 26, 2012, 06:58:32 AM
While the Wembly games are cool and all, I don't think they are going to move a team out of North America permanently.

There are rumors of Goddell thinking about having the SuperBowl in Wembley in the future. Seeing as he got everyone to agree to having one in New York, it is entirely possible too.

I thought that many commentators/insiders have said that a UK expansion is pretty much a sure thing, the only question is when...  there's too much money on the table in breaking into the UK market.  Players don't like it, as they would have to lose a days in travel and be jet lagged to hell.


Lawrence Taylor was on Inside the NFL last night.  First, they grilled him on his arrest for soliciting an underage prostitute... and I mean grilled him.  Then, he hung around, told stories, and busted on Phil Simms.  It was fucking hilarious...  Chris Collinsgworth was falling out of his chair he was laughing so hard. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 26, 2012, 07:01:19 AM
Oh, I don't deny an expansion team there in the future. I just don't think any existing team is going to be moved there. My wording was a bit vague.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 26, 2012, 07:05:17 AM
A Wembly Superbowl would be awesome. There is definitely no shortage of fan support over here in the UK for American Football. Seems like a bit of a pipe dream though. On that note I suspect a London franchise would do better at selling out games than quite a few of the bottom end US franchises (Wow, I didn't realise how bad it was in Cinicinatti (http://espn.go.com/nfl/attendance))

Something that slipped under the radar a few days back; The Rams have signed up to play in the London preseason game for the next three years. (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7482739/st-louis-rams-play-london-games-next-3-years)

The NFL has been growing this annual Wembly game quite a bit over the past 5-6 years or so, and they're supposed to be going to two games a year here in the near future. I will admit that quite a few of us here are interested in the notion of a NFL franchise. Given that the Rams, Jags and Chargers all seem to be franchises with limited shelf-lives, and the financial incentives to grow the league outside of the US, this doesn't seem too ridiculous, does it?

I pity the division that gets a team in Great Britain.

It's not ideal, but it's not impossible. Sticking it in one of the North or East divisions would mean you're looking at a 5hr time difference which isn't great, but it's not the end of the fucking world. I have done the trip between London and the East Coast enough to know that jetlag really isn't too much of an issue and in all likelihood the jetlag coming to the UK is less of a disadvantage then jetlag going the other way. There is a conceivable way to arrange bye weeks and road games such as to minimise the impact. The London team might have to do multiple road games back to back to cut down of flights, and it is not ideal, but not impossible.

I think the key factor is as Johny Cee says, the NFL has fuckall room to grow in the US, and Europe is where the money is.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 26, 2012, 07:07:55 AM
If they're going to do it, they should probably try to do at least two teams so that every game isn't an 8-12 hour flight for a road trip.  A team in Germany and one in England would be a pretty sweet expansion. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on January 26, 2012, 07:14:21 AM
Expansions are tough.  Currently it's set up so perfectly with 2 conferences, 4 divisions each, 4 teams each.  1 or 2 expansion teams would destroy that parity.  I don't think there is enough talent to go around to create the 8 teams needed to keep that system up.   But let's say they added 1 team to each conference so now you have 17 teams in each.  How do you break that up?  You would almost have to add 2 teams each to make it an even 18 then you can go back to 3 divisions with 6 teams each.

I can definitely see teams moving though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 26, 2012, 07:15:00 AM
True; I think the only thing I would be a bit wary of you be moving a whole division to Europe. I have an inkling that it would serve as a dumping ground for unpopular franchises and would wind up being a bit of a joke division without some serious incentives and support from the league. We don't want NFL Europe II, it would have to be the real thing.

As far as the players are concerned, American sports players are somewhat coddled in this regard, since all your major sports are primarily domestic-only. For most global sports players are quite accustomed to travelling to and playing with teams in different countries.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on January 26, 2012, 07:28:37 AM
As far as the players are concerned, American sports players are somewhat coddled in this regard, since all your major sports are primarily domestic-only. For most global sports players are quite accustomed to travelling to and playing with teams in different countries.

It is not the different countries thing, it is that (with the exception of Super 14 Rugby in Aus/NZ/SA) no professional league has to travel across an ocean. Sure, International tours for national teams happen quite often, but it is not the same as having a 5 month schedule flying back an forth across the pond every week.

And the distance traveled by teams in Europe is less than what U.S. teams travel regularly inside the states. It is farther to fly from Boston to San Diego or Seattle to Miami than it is to fly between any two points in continental Europe.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 26, 2012, 07:32:18 AM
True; I think the only thing I would be a bit wary of you be moving a whole division to Europe. I have an inkling that it would serve as a dumping ground for unpopular franchises and would wind up being a bit of a joke division without some serious incentives and support from the league. We don't want NFL Europe II, it would have to be the real thing.

As far as the players are concerned, American sports players are somewhat coddled in this regard, since all your major sports are primarily domestic-only. For most global sports players are quite accustomed to travelling to and playing with teams in different countries.

I don't think they do it on quite such a regular basis, do they?  And if they do isn't it usually in tournament format, and within the continent of Europe?  They aren't often doing transcontinental flights to play.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 26, 2012, 07:38:47 AM
True; I think the only thing I would be a bit wary of you be moving a whole division to Europe. I have an inkling that it would serve as a dumping ground for unpopular franchises and would wind up being a bit of a joke division without some serious incentives and support from the league. We don't want NFL Europe II, it would have to be the real thing.

As far as the players are concerned, American sports players are somewhat coddled in this regard, since all your major sports are primarily domestic-only. For most global sports players are quite accustomed to travelling to and playing with teams in different countries.

You are underestimating the physical beating you take in football and the need for recovery time, as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 26, 2012, 07:50:01 AM
My comment about coddled was more a general one (in part inspired by some of the comments on the ESPN article actually) about players/coaches potentially not being happy at being away from families for long periods of time, which doesn't really hold up in comparison to pretty much every other sport where players and staff have to be mobile and flexible about where they live.

I'm not downplaying the travel issue, it is a big one, but not an impossible one. Transatlantic flights are not as onerous as some of you seem to feel, and I don't imagine that the teams would be shoving their players into cattle class. As you say yourself, there are flights close in length (Miami to Seattle and LA-Boston are both about 5"30; London to Boston is 7 hours one way, 6 the other). If you run a series of road games together as a mini-tour you can cut down on transatlantic travel for the team. It's not an ideal situation though.

I still think the financial upside for the NFL will convince them that these problems can be overcome though.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 26, 2012, 08:11:36 AM
I can definitely see teams moving though.

Yes, this first before we start talking about Euro franchises. We have too many NFL teams right now in shitty shitty territories that don't play ball. Let's do a quick rundown of the worst ones.

1 - Cincinnati - Terrible owner, terrible location, and frankly it's a sports town that hasn't been relevant since the 1990 Reds. They are regularly in the 20s in attendance in the NFL, they were dead last in 2011, and the stadium is mediocre.
2 - St Louis - The wayward Rams. Where to begin? The stadium sucks for starters. The team is always bottom five in attendance over the last 4 years. Nobody wants to watch them on any TV games. They need to get out of a city that only cares about baseball and hockey.
3 - Buffalo - Simply put, that city is dying. The old people are dying and their kids left already. The economy there sucks. Any businesses there are shutting down left and right. Get out while you still can before it looks like a hate crime when you leave.
4 - Jacksonville - Ugh. What a shitty town. I know because I go there every year for the GA/FL game and my sis lives there. They don't deserve a team. They are well known for dodging blackout rules by corporate sponsorship. That stadium is never actually full, tickets sold be damned. They suck on the field, and have no tools that lead you to believe they will ever get the support they need in a city that's basically a glorified port town.

On my watch list:

1 - Miami - Pretty much all professional sports in Miami are on notice. Baseball first.
2 - Tampa Bay - Nothing I hear out of that franchise sounds good going forward. Or their ability to compete or draw fans to the games.
3 - Minnesota - You're not safe. That thing you call a stadium a filthpile. Better step it up of they will ship your cold asses out of Vegas or something.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 26, 2012, 08:16:37 AM
That raises the other point:

Canada will likely get a team at the same time London gets one. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on January 26, 2012, 08:17:05 AM
The Toronto Vikings?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 26, 2012, 08:30:41 AM
The Montreal Dolphins  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 26, 2012, 08:31:48 AM
The Montreal Dolphins  :why_so_serious:

Montreal Dauphins.

Edit:

Language rules in Quebec would force you to have a French team name, I think.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 26, 2012, 09:07:20 AM
I can definitely see teams moving though.

Yes, this first before we start talking about Euro franchises. We have too many NFL teams right now in shitty shitty territories that don't play ball. Let's do a quick rundown of the worst ones.

1 - Cincinnati - Terrible owner, terrible location, and frankly it's a sports town that hasn't been relevant since the 1990 Reds. They are regularly in the 20s in attendance in the NFL, they were dead last in 2011, and the stadium is mediocre.
2 - St Louis - The wayward Rams. Where to begin? The stadium sucks for starters. The team is always bottom five in attendance over the last 4 years. Nobody wants to watch them on any TV games. They need to get out of a city that only cares about baseball and hockey.
3 - Buffalo - Simply put, that city is dying. The old people are dying and their kids left already. The economy there sucks. Any businesses there are shutting down left and right. Get out while you still can before it looks like a hate crime when you leave.
4 - Jacksonville - Ugh. What a shitty town. I know because I go there every year for the GA/FL game and my sis lives there. They don't deserve a team. They are well known for dodging blackout rules by corporate sponsorship. That stadium is never actually full, tickets sold be damned. They suck on the field, and have no tools that lead you to believe they will ever get the support they need in a city that's basically a glorified port town.

On my watch list:

1 - Miami - Pretty much all professional sports in Miami are on notice. Baseball first.
2 - Tampa Bay - Nothing I hear out of that franchise sounds good going forward. Or their ability to compete or draw fans to the games.
3 - Minnesota - You're not safe. That thing you call a stadium a filthpile. Better step it up of they will ship your cold asses out of Vegas or something.

Hate to keep bringing them up, but the Browns - while I know they do have a deal to stay in place - are a mirror of a lot of each point on that list. And frankly, the owner is already over in England. The fans are the only thing that seems to keep shit going in Cleveland as nothing in that city has ever really mattered since the 60s. Sure the Indians were nice in the 90s but if you are from Cleveland, you know that any team from the city will invariably fuck up before the prize. New expansion teams have better overall performance than the "new" Browns. In retrospect, I wish they never returned - most days.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on January 26, 2012, 09:38:35 AM
The Browns are supported by the city, and Cleveland isn't on the list because of that fact. Relevant? No.

However, I think the fans need an outlet for their masochistic hope.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on January 26, 2012, 10:07:23 AM
I'm not downplaying the travel issue, it is a big one, but not an impossible one. Transatlantic flights are not as onerous as some of you seem to feel, and I don't imagine that the teams would be shoving their players into cattle class. As you say yourself, there are flights close in length (Miami to Seattle and LA-Boston are both about 5"30; London to Boston is 7 hours one way, 6 the other). If you run a series of road games together as a mini-tour you can cut down on transatlantic travel for the team. It's not an ideal situation though.

Flying might be uncomfortable for the working classes, but I am sure that most NFL teams (maybe not the Arizona Cardinals or other miserly owners) would splurge for ample seat space and amenities on board.

But is there a real swelling of clamor for NFL action in foreign locales? Outside of ex-pat and curiosity seeking? Maybe in a few of the larger Canadian markets (and I suspect there are only 2-3 maximum here), but I just cannot see sellouts in Madrid, Paris and Berlin.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 26, 2012, 10:36:44 AM
The natural choice for a Toronto team is the Bills, they already have a fair number of fans there.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 26, 2012, 10:47:32 AM
I'm not downplaying the travel issue, it is a big one, but not an impossible one. Transatlantic flights are not as onerous as some of you seem to feel, and I don't imagine that the teams would be shoving their players into cattle class. As you say yourself, there are flights close in length (Miami to Seattle and LA-Boston are both about 5"30; London to Boston is 7 hours one way, 6 the other). If you run a series of road games together as a mini-tour you can cut down on transatlantic travel for the team. It's not an ideal situation though.

Flying might be uncomfortable for the working classes, but I am sure that most NFL teams (maybe not the Arizona Cardinals or other miserly owners) would splurge for ample seat space and amenities on board.

But is there a real swelling of clamor for NFL action in foreign locales? Outside of ex-pat and curiosity seeking? Maybe in a few of the larger Canadian markets (and I suspect there are only 2-3 maximum here), but I just cannot see sellouts in Madrid, Paris and Berlin.

No one is saying Madrid, Paris or Berlin.  The league as much as said last season that London was guaranteed an expansion team.  The question has been more when, if it's a true expansion team or a relocated franchise, etc.  

Toronto looks like another possible, as the Bills have been playing one "home" game in Toronto every year for the last few years....  I mean, moving the Bills keeps them in the same general media market.  Seems win-win.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 26, 2012, 11:35:28 AM
I can really see them doing 2 euro teams simply to make the travel hit just a little less daunting. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on January 26, 2012, 02:49:47 PM
And the distance traveled by teams in Europe is less than what U.S. teams travel regularly inside the states. It is farther to fly from Boston to San Diego or Seattle to Miami than it is to fly between any two points in continental Europe.

I'm always a little surprised how Europeans routinely fail to grasp this.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on January 26, 2012, 03:41:18 PM
And the distance traveled by teams in Europe is less than what U.S. teams travel regularly inside the states. It is farther to fly from Boston to San Diego or Seattle to Miami than it is to fly between any two points in continental Europe.

I'm always a little surprised how Europeans routinely fail to grasp this.

It's because all their countries are itty bitty!  ;D





NFL expansions have less to do with physical locations and more to do with TV rights.


-edit-

I also don't know what the fuck a NFL team would do to the CFL, the Argo's would be fucked for sure at the very least.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on January 27, 2012, 06:05:18 AM
I have a suspicion that the Payton Manning era will be over (http://espn.go.com/nfl/story/_/id/7507255/indianapolis-colts-jim-irsay-upset-peyton-manning-went-public-comments) in Indianapolis very soon. 

Quote
Two days after Peyton Manning publicly complained about the dour atmosphere at team headquarters following a 2-14 season and a rash of firings, Colts owner Jim Irsay introduced his new head coach and then stunned everyone by calling his franchise player a "politician" who had decided to air dirty laundry.

I don't know why Manning just doesn't retire.  His neck will never let him play at a high level again. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 27, 2012, 06:07:59 AM
This is a post I grabbed from elsewhere on LT/Inside the NFL:

Quote
Anyone see Inside the NFL this week? They brought Lawrence Taylor on and just went directly into, as James Brown put it, "soliciting prostitution from an under age young woman." I have never seen anything even remotely this weirdly candid and terrible in a football context. It makes me genuinely uncomfortable but I am riveted. Like an interview version of the Breaking of Theisman's Leg. LT (the real LT) gets pretty candid and Collinsworth goes to town on him. Collinsworth prefaces the interview by denying Brown's comment that he (Collinsworth) had volunteered to be in this segment. "But I suppose I'll be here and *rolls eyes* do our journalistic duty..."

If I had to guess, LT wanted to do a softball mea culpa on some TV show, and Collinsworth bucked the bit and went after him. But what the fuck is this doing on Inside the NFL?

The interview was hard to watch.  JB or Chris would ask a hard question, and then they would let LT go.  They wouldn't jump in to save him when he was winding down.  They didn't go after him, but they asked him hard questions and then let LT talk.

And after the interview?  They kept LT around and he bullshitted and told stories, and busted on Phil Simms.

Another quote:

Quote
Quote
So not to misrepresent -- Collinsworth didn't insult him, he just asked hard, uncomfortable, prodding questions, and followed up. And Taylor, to his credit, took it pretty calmly. And then they had him later on with the larger group and basically shot the shit about the old days, golf, and Reggie White. LT made some pretty insightful comments about the Giants' pass rush. He said lots of teams rush wide to try and get around the pass protection, but the Giants push straight back, and "put the quarterback in an alley."

Oh Jesus, a mock viewer question... "Hey LT, can I have my leg back? Joe from Washington."

And then LT jokes, "I did him a favor... He was on the way out!"

"Dear LT, I heard what you said about Phil and Eli earlier. But seriously, I'm the best Giants quarterback from the Super Bowl Era. Jeff from West Virginia."

All told a pretty excellent episode. There might still be repeats running...

I am an avid watcher of Inside the NFL, and this was the best episode that I have ever seen. The interview was as hard hitting as any that I have ever watched, and LT made it through remarkably well. JB and Colinsworth were definately not pulling any punches, and LT's responses were as candid as it gets. I really liked how human it made LT look, and I was glad that his reaction was so authentic and there were no flowery promises of never making a mistake again.

The final segment just floored me. I have never seen Phil Simms as handled as LT did while sharing stories of the old days. I couldn't stop laughing. His 3-30 for 300 yards comments were just priceless. Also the Thiesman comments were freaking awesome. They made a note that Thiesman wasn't in the studio. I woulnd't be in the same room with LT ever again if I were him


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on January 27, 2012, 06:25:53 AM
This is a post I grabbed from elsewhere on LT/Inside the NFL:

Quote
Anyone see Inside the NFL this week? They brought Lawrence Taylor on and just went directly into, as James Brown put it, "soliciting prostitution from an under age young woman." I have never seen anything even remotely this weirdly candid and terrible in a football context. It makes me genuinely uncomfortable but I am riveted. Like an interview version of the Breaking of Theisman's Leg. LT (the real LT) gets pretty candid and Collinsworth goes to town on him. Collinsworth prefaces the interview by denying Brown's comment that he (Collinsworth) had volunteered to be in this segment. "But I suppose I'll be here and *rolls eyes* do our journalistic duty..."

If I had to guess, LT wanted to do a softball mea culpa on some TV show, and Collinsworth bucked the bit and went after him. But what the fuck is this doing on Inside the NFL?

The interview was hard to watch.  JB or Chris would ask a hard question, and then they would let LT go.  They wouldn't jump in to save him when he was winding down.  They didn't go after him, but they asked him hard questions and then let LT talk.


LT was a great player but a psychopath. Players today like Harrison and others get lambasted for being assholes and menace to society types but LT was in a different league. I mean the recent stuff with child rape, drug arrests and leaving the scene of an accident  paper over the stuff influential people shielded him from during his playing days -- like mundane stuff of getting into an accident and punching out the other driver.

Though he never shot at passing motorists and police helicopters chasing in pursuit, while on freeway, like this famous Steeler defensive lineman. (http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?id=5058107)

Quote

He was convinced the trucks were after him. He pulled a shotgun from the floor and started shooting at the tires of passing trucks. He stuck his shotgun out the window, already blasted open by his own bullets, and kept shooting. The state police were on his tail now, chasing him at ninety miles an hour. He veered off the main road, blew out a tire, and jumped out of his car, running into a nearby forest. He carried his shotgun with him.

A police helicopter swirled overhead and Holmes, surrounded by state police, began shooting at it, hitting an officer in the ankle. Moments later, surrounded and exhausted, he was finally in cuffs. Said one officer afterward: "We could have killed him a dozen times."

That night in jail, Holmes called Dan Rooney. "We'll do everything we can for you," Rooney told him. "Try not to worry." It was a Saturday. Holmes would be in jail for the weekend, until a judge could hear his case and consider bail. He slept with a stick by his side, unaware that he was the biggest man in the cell.

That Monday, represented by a lawyer paid for by the Rooneys, Holmes was released on $45,000 bail, also paid by the Rooneys, and admitted to a psych hospital in western Pennsylvania, again paid for by the Rooneys. He was supposed to be there for a month. He stayed for two. Art Rooney visited nearly every day. L.C. Greenwood took him on supervised trips around town. This was a kid who showed only flashes of the kind of mental strength necessary to be a consistent starter. Yet he was treated as if he were Joe Greene. "We all thought," says Art Rooney Jr., "he needed mercy."

That summer, after his stay in the hospital, Holmes went back to Ohio and pled guilty to assault with a deadly weapon. At sentencing, a psychiatrist testified that he suffered from acute paranoid psychosis. Holmes was given five years probation. That July he was back in training camp. And that September he was the Steelers starting defensive tackle.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 27, 2012, 06:56:35 AM
I'm not downplaying the travel issue, it is a big one, but not an impossible one. Transatlantic flights are not as onerous as some of you seem to feel, and I don't imagine that the teams would be shoving their players into cattle class. As you say yourself, there are flights close in length (Miami to Seattle and LA-Boston are both about 5"30; London to Boston is 7 hours one way, 6 the other). If you run a series of road games together as a mini-tour you can cut down on transatlantic travel for the team. It's not an ideal situation though.

Flying might be uncomfortable for the working classes, but I am sure that most NFL teams (maybe not the Arizona Cardinals or other miserly owners) would splurge for ample seat space and amenities on board.

But is there a real swelling of clamor for NFL action in foreign locales? Outside of ex-pat and curiosity seeking? Maybe in a few of the larger Canadian markets (and I suspect there are only 2-3 maximum here), but I just cannot see sellouts in Madrid, Paris and Berlin.

London and the UK in general has a solid and growing fanbase for the NFL. Given a local franchise and adequate promotion it would be a pretty easy sell I think. I guess one measure of growing interest is the fact that there are now 72 UK universities with American football teams (http://www.buafl.net/university.aspx), and that number is growing steadily year. While the standard is not amazing (probably falling below most 3A or 4A high school leagues in competitive states). This number is up from 37 teams in 2005. There is also a substantial Am-Pro interest in the country, probably similar to the level of interest people in the US have for the Premier League or La Liga. It's not enough to support its own league, but a single team would be no problem. The sell-out preseason games at Wembly are mostly Londoners and other British NFL fans, not a motley crew of ex-pats and such.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on January 27, 2012, 07:02:31 AM
So would we start calling it the IFL?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 27, 2012, 07:08:07 AM
IHEL (International Hand Egg League)  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on January 27, 2012, 07:40:40 AM
I say move the Jets to London (Jets are a fake football team anyway) and rename them to something clever so they can play the New England Patriots twice a year in what most of the media would butcher and call the Revolution bowl twice a year every year.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on January 27, 2012, 09:35:10 AM
Jets would actually be an appropriate name seeing as how much time the team would be spending on them.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on January 27, 2012, 09:54:45 AM
Poor Billy Cundiff. This is terrible and hilarious.

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nfl-shutdown-corner/expect-delivery-billy-cundiff-jersey-wide-left-080349417.html

(http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/p5dC4HWOiXcFJhHtxszqHQ--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en/blogs/sptusnflexperts/Billy-Cundiff-web-store.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on January 27, 2012, 10:08:13 AM
Hahahaha awesome.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on January 27, 2012, 10:22:57 AM
That is fantastic.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 27, 2012, 10:57:27 AM
Move the Redskins, rename them to the Redcoats.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 27, 2012, 11:02:05 AM
Should go totally Old School and name the team after one of the colonial period American regiments...  "Royal American Rangers"?  It would be awesome how confused the American fans would be.

The Canadian team should be the Rough Riders, of course.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on January 27, 2012, 11:02:28 AM
Why not, they mostly are already!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on January 27, 2012, 11:04:03 AM
Why not just base out of an east coast city? 8 times a year you fly to London for the game. I know this fucks with your 'home field' advantage but they could schedule blocks or like 3 home games in a row and away weeks, where they stay at the east coast home base. I know all this coasts some dollars, but fuck it the NFL makes some.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on January 27, 2012, 11:07:23 AM
Why not, they mostly are already!

Or the "Kraft Dinners".   Silly Canadians.


Why not just base out of an east coast city? 8 times a year you fly to London for the game. I know this fucks with your 'home field' advantage but they could schedule blocks or like 3 home games in a row and away weeks, where they stay at the east coast home base. I know all this coasts some dollars, but fuck it the NFL makes some.

You need fans to buy in.  This setup sounds and feels kludgy, and even if you get a city to do it, fans in that city won't give shit. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on January 27, 2012, 12:33:55 PM
In case you needed another reason to want to see Tom Brady die in a car fire-
http://deadspin.com/5880019/tom-brady-gave-all-his-teammates-uggs-to-celebrate-their-super-bowl-appearance



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on January 27, 2012, 12:42:57 PM
Ugh.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: K9 on January 27, 2012, 03:38:58 PM
That's just surreal


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on February 05, 2012, 03:30:45 PM
Rofl.   Best intentional grounding ever.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on February 05, 2012, 03:35:41 PM
Rofl.   Best intentional grounding ever.

I can only pray that will be the final score   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on February 05, 2012, 03:55:03 PM
I just want to pop in and admire the M&M, Chevy and Battleship commercials! 

Oh Budweiser, you still spend all your money on commercials instead of making decent beer.

Also, I believe there is a game on.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bzalthek on February 05, 2012, 04:08:31 PM
The commercial for The Dictator was pretty funny.  Too bad that's probably all the funny that will be in the movie.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Merusk on February 05, 2012, 05:27:20 PM
M&Ms was the only legitimately funny commercial this year, IMO.  The Chevy one I was amused by only because the others have been so very, very horrible.

The Audi one w/ vampires for the new headlights I'd seen earlier this week and I still want to vomit when I see it.  Something about it just oozes pretentiousness to me so I think:   Audi: continuing to make commercials that make you hate the folks who drive us.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on February 05, 2012, 05:38:41 PM
Brady forgot where he was after that hit. He was trying to pick grass out of his face mask hehe.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on February 05, 2012, 06:08:14 PM
Nice catch Chimpy, I saw that but it didn't sink in.  Really good game going on, both QB's playing great but officiating is starting to crap out.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on February 05, 2012, 06:31:59 PM
Oops.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on February 05, 2012, 06:33:20 PM
Haha.

Edit: man I hope the game ends with a sack on Brady



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on February 05, 2012, 06:40:37 PM
Grats Giants

Eli=2 rings
Peyton=1 ring

Nice comeback from a 7-7 season.  Eli is truly an elite QB.

Edit:  Spelling.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Llyse on February 05, 2012, 06:41:06 PM
I've been listening to BBC5 live radio and it's hilarious how Bradshaw should have taken a knee instead of scoring.

Greedy bastard but otherwise it was a great game.  :heart:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on February 05, 2012, 06:41:18 PM
Phew!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on February 05, 2012, 06:42:24 PM
I've been listening to BBC5 live radio and it's hilarious how Bradshaw should have taken a knee instead of scoring.

Greedy bastard but otherwise it was a great game.  :heart:

He really tried to slow down it seemed, even trying to grab one of his blockers but he moved just out of the way.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on February 05, 2012, 06:44:29 PM
I dislike both those teams but I dislike the giants less. Also, Eli has proven in the last couple months that he belongs up there with guys like his brother. I am not sure there has been anyone as calm in the clutch as he is since Elway.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on February 05, 2012, 06:46:47 PM
I dislike both those teams but I dislike the giants less. Also, Eli has proven in the last couple months that he belongs up there with guys like his brother. I am not sure there has been anyone as calm in the clutch as he is since Elway.

I'm in the same boat.  But since I despise the Patriots while merely disliking the Giants, I'm glad the latter won.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on February 05, 2012, 06:46:56 PM
Eli needs to remain Eli. He keeps fucking that up against the Pats. People are going to start taking him seriously which will kill whatever genie he has in his pocket.  :why_so_serious:

I don't care about the Giants, but I can't stand the Pats... so NY! FUCK YEAH!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on February 05, 2012, 07:03:13 PM
ELIIIIIIIII


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on February 05, 2012, 07:05:44 PM
So... had a drinking game with a buddy while watching the Superbowl.

Whenever Eli looked stupid, drink.
Whenever Brady looked broody, drink.

It was a long, long, long game. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 05, 2012, 07:19:45 PM
I'm surprised you can even type at this point, JC.  

Also, I suppose that this ends any discussion of how shitty Eli is.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on February 05, 2012, 07:25:36 PM
Yeah, right.  Just like if the Giants lose their opener next year, some people will be calling for Coughlin's head.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on February 05, 2012, 08:14:05 PM
I'm surprised you can even type at this point, JC.  

Also, I suppose that this ends any discussion of how shitty Eli is.   :oh_i_see:

Gets worse....  before the game, we decided to pick something ridiculous to chug a beer.  We decided on?  A safety.  FUUUUUCCCCCKKKKK.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: naum on February 05, 2012, 08:43:51 PM
Limbaugh Picks a Super Bowl Winner (http://tucsoncitizen.com/usa-today-sports/2012/02/05/limbaugh-picks-a-super-bowl-winner-his-nose/)

(https://img.skitch.com/20120206-p4rpmiuxfi65yqe71i9jkwbst.png)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on February 05, 2012, 10:34:33 PM
Oh good another reason to hate the Patriots :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on February 05, 2012, 10:37:23 PM
I'm surprised you can even type at this point, JC.  

Also, I suppose that this ends any discussion of how shitty Eli is.   :oh_i_see:
I was actually looking at his stats after the game and man I didn't realize just how mediocre his career stats have been so far. He had a great year this season but we'll have to wait and see if next season he reverts back to his previous form or if he's really a better QB now.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 05, 2012, 11:03:05 PM
Yeah, right.  Just like if the Giants lose their opener next year, some people will be calling for Coughlin's head.

It's part of the fanbase's charm.

Also:

 :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real: :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Surlyboi on February 06, 2012, 12:18:01 AM
Oh. Fuck. Yeah.

As a Jet fan, I have to hate the Giants. Of course, as a New Yorker, I hate Boston even more. Enemy of my enemy and all that shit.

Did anyone else notice Brady seemed to be wearing eyeliner?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 06, 2012, 12:24:08 AM
I have always been amused by the Jets/Giants dynamic. Every Jets fan I know (except my mother) HATES the Giants and their fans. Giants fans, on the other hand, barely remember the Jets exist outside of any games they happen to play against them. It's this totally one-sided hatred, and I can't say I blame the Jets fans, but it is adorable.  :heart:

I always feel warmly towards the Jets, personally, even when they are SUPER OBNOXIOUS (Rex Ryan is an asshole, see). I find them utterly impossible to hate.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Surlyboi on February 06, 2012, 12:44:08 AM
Well, the Jet fan hatred comes, more-or-less from the fact that a lot of Giants fans tend to hear you're a Jet fan and then laugh at how sorry the team has been since pretty much '69 and laugh at you for being a fan of such a sorry team.

I don't really -hate- the Giants, but it's required in the contract I sign that I at least have to profess to hate them occasionally. And like I said, any team the can repeatedly humiliate the Pats in the Super Bowl does definitely get points in my book.

And yes, Rex is an asshole, but it's a motivational tactic that seemed to work for a couple of years, until he started going soft on his players and not holding them accountable for a litany of fuckups this season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 06, 2012, 12:48:30 AM
I would more expect a condescending sort of, "Aww, you root for the Jets? That's adorable!" sort of thing than straight up mirth. Still a reason to hate, of course.  :heart:

The worst part for the Jets, I assume, is they get a bunch of spillover "GRAAAH I HATE NEW YORK TEEEEEEEEAMS" hate from people who don't understand that the only reason New Yorkers don't consider the Jets THE red-headed stepchild of New York Sports Teams is because the Islanders still exist (and the Mets probably beat out the Jets too).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: taolurker on February 06, 2012, 01:02:04 AM
(https://p.twimg.com/Ak7iLNpCAAAcg24.jpg)

Wish this was mine...


Also, I think Surly's description of the Jets/Giants rivalry is accurate, except maybe for the Meadowlands football stadium previously being named "Giants Stadium". I too am a Jets fan, and the constant harassment from the Giants fans used to also include "Why do the Jets play in Giants Stadium? They can't even get their own field". Now that it's MetLife stadium, that isn't as much of a problem, and I was a fan since they played in Shea Stadium (which was also where I first saw the Jets play).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 06, 2012, 06:20:25 AM
Giants won the game because they had the more balanced team. Which again, reminds us that all the looooooove about "Year of the Quarterback" bullshit is exactly that. Bullshit. If you have a solid defense, a quality running game, great special teams, and a QB that doesn't make mistakes? You will beat teams in the NFL. There's no one facet of the game you can ignore and hope to be successful. The Patriots ignored their defense, and it cost them in the long run yet again.

Also, any time your D can get 2 sacks, 5 tackles for loss, and 7 pass deflections? Yeah, you're going to shut down an offense for the most part.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on February 06, 2012, 08:50:29 AM
I think they may well have been one of the most boring Super Bowls I've watched since San Fran put up 55 points against Denver. I never really doubted the Giants would win for some reason. Goddamn you, Football Gods, for making me have to acknowledge Eli Manning as one of football's greats (even though neither of his Super Bowl wins have been that great statistically). He has shown a tremendous amount of poise in the big games and that counts for a lot. Until the Blackburn interception and the Manningham catch on the sidelines, there really wasn't anything in the game to get too excited about. It was a well-coached, well-played game, it was just boring. The Pats receivers forgetting how to catch the ball was a nice bit of  :why_so_serious: .

The officiating was SO GODDAMN BAD. Look, I understand for the Super Bowl, you want to let players play so that the flow of the game isn't constantly interrupted by ticky-tack pass interference calls. Now, how about you keep those rules in place for the REST OF THE GODDAMN SEASON, YOU MOTHERFUCKING MUPPETS. Seriously, there were at least 3 no-calls that would have been spot fouls during the regular season, so why aren't they called now? Because the game is on the biggest TV stage of all? Fuck you. Be consistent.

Most of the commercials were unmemorable and uninteresting. GoDaddy needs to die in a car fire. We get it, TITS. Fuck off. It wasn't that interesting the first time you did it, how many years has it been? And what happened to Budweiser? They haven't had relevant ads in a decade. Here We Go was about the only interesting Bud commercial out there. And fuck you, GE for your manipulative heart-warming bullshit. Pay some goddamn corporate taxes, you fucks, then you can gush about how you are changing lives. Fuckheads.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Surlyboi on February 06, 2012, 08:56:55 AM
In case you needed another reason to want to see Tom Brady die in a car fire-
http://deadspin.com/5880019/tom-brady-gave-all-his-teammates-uggs-to-celebrate-their-super-bowl-appearance



Speaking of which, there was a huge poster of Brady's smugly mug wearing his shitty sponsor boots in the Ugg store on 58th between 5th and Madison. That poster was mysteriously absent this morning, with only some shreds of paper stuck to the now blank space where the poster hung.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Outlawedprod on February 06, 2012, 09:47:05 AM
http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/7546795/tom-brady-wife-gisele-bundchen-blasts-new-england-patriots-receivers

Unfortunately no one appears to have got her excuse for why Brady committed intentional grounding while in the end zone.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on February 06, 2012, 09:48:44 AM
http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/7546795/tom-brady-wife-gisele-bundchen-blasts-new-england-patriots-receivers

Unfortunately no one appears to have got her excuse for why Brady committed intentional grounding while in the end zone.

Incoming Yoko Ono syndrome!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on February 06, 2012, 09:54:59 AM
I really thought that intentional grounding call was a bit dubious. As in "maybe that's what the rule says but... REALLY?"


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on February 06, 2012, 09:59:16 AM
No one really seemed to argue.  It was so blatantly obvious. It was a nice deep ball, I'll give him that.

Glad the Giants won.  But I haven't really been an active Giants fan since high school. College turned me into a homer.

And in great, common sense inspired news, it looks like they're pondering killing off the Pro Bowl.  About fucking time.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on February 06, 2012, 10:00:02 AM
I have always been amused by the Jets/Giants dynamic. Every Jets fan I know (except my mother) HATES the Giants and their fans. Giants fans, on the other hand, barely remember the Jets exist outside of any games they happen to play against them. It's this totally one-sided hatred, and I can't say I blame the Jets fans, but it is adorable.  :heart:

I always feel warmly towards the Jets, personally, even when they are SUPER OBNOXIOUS (Rex Ryan is an asshole, see). I find them utterly impossible to hate.

So true.  I don't hate the Jets, I actually root for them if I see them playing.  Yet the Jets have such a little brother complex it's incredible.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 06, 2012, 10:09:29 AM
I really thought that intentional grounding call was a bit dubious. As in "maybe that's what the rule says but... REALLY?"

Nothing dubious about it. You can't just fling the ball down the field to get rid of pressure.

Then again, it really had no profound outcome on the game. The reality was that Brady was having to move around way too much due to pressure, he was getting his passes knocked down, and his receivers didn't make catches down the stretch.

Also, I don't think the officiating was bad. I hate the pass interference call in the NFL as it stands. Just because you can see the half a second contact on slo-mo doesn't mean it should get a call. In fact, I think that the rules are so stacked against the corners with the bullshit "illegal contact" 5 yard rule, that you need to give them more leeway on the back end. The only thing I thought the refs might have missed was a few obvious holding calls on the Pats down the stretch, but that was mainly because the refs weren't going to call anything except running 12 out on the field.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ghambit on February 06, 2012, 10:11:37 AM
http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/7546795/tom-brady-wife-gisele-bundchen-blasts-new-england-patriots-receivers

Unfortunately no one appears to have got her excuse for why Brady committed intentional grounding while in the end zone.

Because he didnt want to get strip-sacked in the endzone by the best past rushing defense in the NFL maybe?  :oh_i_see:
Personally I believe it was the smarter play.  Regardless, between Tuck lining him up and JPP bearing down on him it's likely there would have been a sack anyways.  Why risk the fumble-touchdown?

The only alternative he had was to curl up into a ball like a little bitch and take the safety that way.  But really?  Who's gonna do that at the superbowl in front of billions?  I'd rather take my chances with the refs.

As for his bitchy wife, she should've been complaining at the coaching staff for having a slow slot-midget (welker) run a fly route down the seam and expect him to run under and jumpcatch an overthrown Brady bomb.  Sure, he does it occasionally but the odds are better with an Ochocinco... who shoud've seen more action the way the game was shaping up.  The G-men had Welker and the middle of the field largely contained, and with Gronk injured it made no sense to keep chugging away at the usual strategy.  It really was a game Ocho (or Branch even) shoulda seen more touches.

I hate the Pats, glad they lost.  But they really deserved to lose this one even though technically they should've won.  Lot of close plays that would've likely ended it for the Giants (lost fumbles, missed catches, etc.).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on February 06, 2012, 10:13:19 AM

Then again, it really had no profound outcome on the game.

Well, take away 2 points and the patriots can try to get into field goal range on the last drive instead of needing a touchdown. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on February 06, 2012, 10:16:26 AM
I am surprised no one is talking about Bradshaw trying NOT to get a touchdown.  Yes, I know what he was trying to do, but this is fucking FOOTBALL, not chess.  If you can get in the endzone, you get in the damn endzone.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on February 06, 2012, 10:18:35 AM
I disagree. If he goes down at the one foot line, they can run the clock down as far as they want, and there is no chance for a tipped Hail Mary TD.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on February 06, 2012, 10:19:25 AM
I don't like putting the game in the hands of a kicker.  Ideally, you want New England to burn that last time out, but I think your chances better with the touchdown.

This is brought to you by someone that had to watch his team lose a rivalry game 2 years ago because of two blocked extra points. Fucking kickers.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 06, 2012, 10:19:50 AM

Then again, it really had no profound outcome on the game.

Well, take away 2 points and the patriots can try to get into field goal range on the last drive instead of needing a touchdown. 

It was the first offensive play of the game for the Patriots. It's too far away from what happened at the end to say it had almost any real effect. I can point to the fact that they had to kick a FG from the 11 rather than getting a TD as a bigger cause. Or throwing a 4th quarter interception. Or the Wes Welker drop.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on February 06, 2012, 10:20:53 AM
I am surprised no one is talking about Bradshaw trying NOT to get a touchdown.  Yes, I know what he was trying to do, but this is fucking FOOTBALL, not chess.  If you can get in the endzone, you get in the damn endzone.
You could say the same about letting him score.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on February 06, 2012, 10:24:25 AM
http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/7546795/tom-brady-wife-gisele-bundchen-blasts-new-england-patriots-receivers

Unfortunately no one appears to have got her excuse for why Brady committed intentional grounding while in the end zone.

Because he didnt want to get strip-sacked in the endzone by the best past rushing defense in the NFL maybe?  :oh_i_see:
Personally I believe it was the smarter play.  Regardless, between Tuck lining him up and JPP bearing down on him it's likely there would have been a sack anyways.  Why risk the fumble-touchdown?

The only alternative he had was to curl up into a ball like a little bitch and take the safety that way.  But really?  Who's gonna do that at the superbowl in front of billions?  I'd rather take my chances with the refs.

As for his bitchy wife, she should've been complaining at the coaching staff for having a slow slot-midget (welker) run a fly route down the seam and expect him to run under and jumpcatch an overthrown Brady bomb.  Sure, he does it occasionally but the odds are better with an Ochocinco... who shoud've seen more action the way the game was shaping up.  The G-men had Welker and the middle of the field largely contained, and with Gronk injured it made no sense to keep chugging away at the usual strategy.  It really was a game Ocho (or Branch even) shoulda seen more touches.

I hate the Pats, glad they lost.  But they really deserved to lose this one even though technically they should've won.  Lot of close plays that would've likely ended it for the Giants (lost fumbles, missed catches, etc.).

Wow.  Good to see you are consistently an insane person.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on February 06, 2012, 10:25:01 AM
I don't like putting the game in the hands of a kicker.  Ideally, you want New England to burn that last time out, but I think your chances better with the touchdown.

This is brought to you by someone that had to watch his team lose a rivalry game 2 years ago because of two blocked extra points. Fucking kickers.

Doesn't necessarily have to be a kick- you can make them burn the timeout and then run another play. Unless of course it was 3rd down...I was watching from a poker table, so some of the specifics escaped me. Tynes has been money on big kicks though, and that is even closer than a PAT. But in general, I agree- playing for a kick is dangerous.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on February 06, 2012, 10:36:48 AM
I disagree. If he goes down at the one foot line, they can run the clock down as far as they want, and there is no chance for a tipped Hail Mary TD.

Tactically it makes sense but it is loser thinking.  I am glad Bradshaw couldn't stop himself.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on February 06, 2012, 10:40:46 AM
I disagree. If he goes down at the one foot line, they can run the clock down as far as they want, and there is no chance for a tipped Hail Mary TD.

Tactically it makes sense but it is loser thinking.  I am glad Bradshaw couldn't stop himself.

Reports are that Coughlin wanted a touchdown anyway, and Eli yelled at him not to score AS he handed the ball off.    :why_so_serious:

Seriously, I think score the points and play defense. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ghambit on February 06, 2012, 10:53:19 AM
Ask Harbaugh of the Ravens what the better strategy is.   :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Fordel on February 06, 2012, 10:56:31 AM
Yea that whole "Let them Score!" from the Pats and the "No no Don't score!" from the Giants was really bizarre to me.


It wasn't like the game was some wild west shootout, the Giants D had been handling the Patriots pretty darn well for most of that game.






Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sky on February 06, 2012, 11:02:07 AM
Ask Harbaugh of the Ravens what the better strategy is.   :awesome_for_real:
That was the thought primary in my mind. There's a case for running out the clock, but I think he handled it really well. Paused to run down a couple seconds, but didn't let the Pats hit him and risk a turn-over.

Chad Johnson should have had the ball WAY more.

Giants D should've been MVP.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 06, 2012, 11:13:25 AM
The media continues to focus on the wrong things about this game. Eli gets the MVP and the throw to Manningham gets all the airplay and kudos.

Bear in mind that the Manningham catch was a 1st down throw. And the fact that during the last drive the Patriots "defense" didn't even force a freaking 3rd down conversion. The Pats were so awful on that side of the ball, that they knew they had to let the Giants score just to get a chance.

The deep ball interception in the 4th quarter was the best play of the game, imo, and it turned the tide.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on February 06, 2012, 11:22:58 AM
From an MSN article:

Quote
Coach Tom Coughlin insisted ''the prize'' was still within reach. [/quote}

I keep giggling because I picture Belicheck and Coughlin sword-fighting in the parking lot, as there can be only one.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ghambit on February 06, 2012, 11:29:49 AM
The deep ball interception in the 4th quarter was the best play of the game, imo, and it turned the tide.

This.  Had to be one of the 1st times that play has actually ever happened in a Superbowl.  A giant tight-end and a middle linebacker going at it 50 yds. down the middle of the field, wherein the MLB comes up with a pick.  I dont think I've ever seen that actually.

I give it to Brady for giving Gronk a shot at that one, but the reality is (as I've said before) that the play should've been designed for someone else.  A 1-legged tight-end streaking down the middle for a jump ball... ummmm, yah.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 06, 2012, 11:31:57 AM
That play wasn't 'designed'.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on February 06, 2012, 11:32:11 AM
If the Pats really did just let Bradshaw walk in for the score, that makes me really fucking hate them and Belichek. It's just a real dick move. You can say all you want about the strategy and I understand that aspect of it. But it totally fucks with my thought that there should be some honest pride in your defense that would tell a coach that asked them to let a guy waltz in for a score to go fuck himself.

EDIT: Also, that INT by Blackburn was a really stupid throw by Brady. He was trying to make something happen that he never should have. The ball was underthrown and Gronk let the linebacker get underneath him. The best Gronk could hope for was to knock it down so Blackburn couldn't get it. That's the play that really turned the game. If it had been Eli or Brett Favre making that play, we'd have said "That's just Eli being Eli." Instead, Brady makes a bonehead play that gives the Giants the ball back and the sports media is talking about dropped passes. Not to diminish the magnitude of the dropped passes, but if Brady throws that ball away, they may not have mattered.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ghambit on February 06, 2012, 11:37:41 AM
That play wasn't 'designed'.

So Gronk streaked down the middle 'cause he felt like it?   :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 06, 2012, 11:49:42 AM
Broken play due to the pass rush. The receivers were well into the 'oh shit scramble around and just try to get open' mode by the time the throw was made. Gronk probably ran in a straight line because he can't really do anything more compliacted on a bum ankle.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 06, 2012, 11:55:17 AM
EDIT: Also, that INT by Blackburn was a really stupid throw by Brady. He was trying to make something happen that he never should have. The ball was underthrown and Gronk let the linebacker get underneath him. The best Gronk could hope for was to knock it down so Blackburn couldn't get it. That's the play that really turned the game. If it had been Eli or Brett Favre making that play, we'd have said "That's just Eli being Eli." Instead, Brady makes a bonehead play that gives the Giants the ball back and the sports media is talking about dropped passes. Not to diminish the magnitude of the dropped passes, but if Brady throws that ball away, they may not have mattered.

Boneheaded or not, that's an outstanding play by a linebacker to stay in coverage in a broken play with a tight end that's much bigger than you. That's why I gave it my "play of the game" vote.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on February 06, 2012, 12:29:44 PM
Oh no doubt. Most of the talk this week was about the "new breed" of tight ends that "you can't cover with a linebacker!" And yet, Blackburn, who got released early in the season and was substitute teaching school, won that battle. And it most certainly was the most important play of the game. Maybe Gronk could have come back to the ball well enough if he wasn't injured, but he didn't and the scrub linebacker turned the tide of the game. For that play alone, he should have been MVP instead of Manning, but you knew that wasn't going to happen.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 06, 2012, 12:34:22 PM
Of course not. Not in the YEAR OF THE QUARTERBACK !!!ONE!  :oh_i_see:

Some shit drives me crazy about how football gets covered these days. The game hasn't changed as much as the media wants to paint it. The QB is not the goddamn most important thing on the field, you knob-slobbing morons at ESPN.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on February 06, 2012, 12:41:59 PM
You guys are acting like Eli pulled a Trent Dilfer or something.  Dude completed 75% of his passes for nearly 300 yards and one TD.  I don't remember a pass of his that was even close to being picked off.  He threw another pass that will be shown in every Super Bowl highlight from here to eternity.    I think the only other person you could realistically give it to would be Tuck.  Maybe share the trophy.  

Yah, it was against a shit D.  But he still made the plays when he needed to and, yet again, pulled another 4th quarter drive out of his ass.

With Eli's attitude, he probably doesn't even care.  Monday's taco night.  Eli was probably already on to thinking about red chili pork or tequila lime chicken the second the game was done.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on February 06, 2012, 01:14:14 PM
No, he had a GOOD game, especially considering the no picks. It just wasn't gaudy QB numbers like the media has been wetting themselves over all year. To me, MVP QB's ought to have gaudy numbers or you might look elsewhere. Of course, compared to games like Rothliesberger's first Super Bowl, I guess it was pretty good.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 06, 2012, 01:50:03 PM
If the Pats really did just let Bradshaw walk in for the score, that makes me really fucking hate them and Belichek. It's just a real dick move. You can say all you want about the strategy and I understand that aspect of it. But it totally fucks with my thought that there should be some honest pride in your defense that would tell a coach that asked them to let a guy waltz in for a score to go fuck himself.

They knew they were fucked.  Better to at least have a chance to win, rather than having the Giants milk the clock down to 5 seconds and kick a field goal (which is what was going to happen). 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Malakili on February 06, 2012, 01:52:04 PM
If the Pats really did just let Bradshaw walk in for the score, that makes me really fucking hate them and Belichek. It's just a real dick move. You can say all you want about the strategy and I understand that aspect of it. But it totally fucks with my thought that there should be some honest pride in your defense that would tell a coach that asked them to let a guy waltz in for a score to go fuck himself.

You make the choice that you think leaves you with the best chance to win. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on February 06, 2012, 01:53:39 PM
The game hasn't changed as much as the media wants to paint it. The QB is not the goddamn most important thing on the field, you knob-slobbing morons at ESPN.

The game has changed a lot in the last 25 years.  Rules to WR and QB contact, protection, and popularization of dome stadiums and artificial turf all contributed.  In my humble opinion, the offense has a larger advantage than ever in the history of the sport.  I do agree that coverage has become clownshoes though.  Overanalysis ruins the game.

On the other topic, I think Belichek is a football genius.  The man knows the sport better than nearly everyone on the planet from an X's and O's standpoint.  His players let him down this year.

Edit: I may have to revise this statement.  I think that Belichek got every drop of talent out of his team.  The giants just played a sound game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 06, 2012, 02:09:31 PM
That safety lost the Pats the game.  Without it, they could have held for the FG and been fine.  Okay, so their shitty defense didn't help much, but the safety was a killer.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 06, 2012, 02:13:41 PM
That safety lost the Pats the game.  Without it, they could have held for the FG and been fine.  Okay, so their shitty defense didn't help much, but the safety was a killer.

Not to mention what could potentially have happened on that drive.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 06, 2012, 02:32:02 PM
With Eli's attitude, he probably doesn't even care.  Monday's taco night.  Eli was probably already on to thinking about red chili pork or tequila lime chicken the second the game was done.

I kinda feel like that is why he got the MVP. He didn't put up gaudy numbers, but as derp as he looks 99% of the time, he is the calmest motherfucker around in pressure situations.


Unlike the last time the Giants beat the Patriots in the Superbowl (the defense won the shit out of that game), it doesn't bug me that they gave it to Eli this time at all. I see it more as a "you were pretty much the rock for this team the entire season" award than anything in this case.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on February 06, 2012, 02:36:26 PM
Now he needs 10 more seasons to knock off the most consecutive starts.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on February 06, 2012, 02:44:46 PM
Giants were last in rushing this season, Eli deserves the MVP.  Not that Eli cares, Sears has Dockers 40% off but just until Wednesday.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on February 06, 2012, 03:15:02 PM
Giants were last in rushing this season, Eli deserves the MVP.  Not that Eli cares, Sears has Dockers 40% off but just until Wednesday.

Eli finally accepted the keys to the Camaro because his baby needed something to chew on...  she's teething.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: TheWalrus on February 06, 2012, 03:36:48 PM
Corvette maybe?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on February 06, 2012, 03:51:05 PM
I was just sitting down after work to download the game to make a gif from last night and the Internet beat me to it.

(http://dl.dropbox.com/u/111434/facepalm.gif)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 06, 2012, 03:52:43 PM
Ahh, the exact moment when THEY knew they were going to lose.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 06, 2012, 04:19:49 PM
Giants were last in rushing this season, Eli deserves the MVP.  Not that Eli cares, Sears has Dockers 40% off but just until Wednesday.

Right, like when they got beat by the Skins and the Seahawks?

Nothing about the regular season was "great" for the Giants. It was good enough to scrape by with some bad injuries and some weak wins against mental midget teams (mine included), and one against the Pats whom they just own for some reason.

The playoffs? They averaged 116 yards a game. That would have moved them from dead last in the regular season to middle of the pack. In essence, their rushing game was 1.5 times better in the playoffs than it was in the regular season.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 06, 2012, 04:20:48 PM
Eli's regular season was legitimately great. Giants problem was injuries, injuries, injuries. So fire the trainers, and give everyone else a raise.

EDIT: Also I can't help but think you may have completely misread what Tannhauser said?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 06, 2012, 04:25:21 PM
Eli's regular season was legitimately great. Giants problem was injuries, injuries, injuries. So fire the trainers, and give everyone else a raise.

EDIT: Also I can't help but think you may have completely misread what Tannhauser said?

Eli didn't deserve the MVP any more than any QB who wins the Superbowl does. I would have just given it to the defense and special teams, but it's a one man award so it defaults to the guy who throws the ball.

Again, it's not about me not liking Eli. He is a collected guy. But the Patriots with their backs against the wall couldn't even force a third down on that final drive! I mean, that's probably the most limp-dicked defense in the NFL that made it in the playoffs. And they were getting away with it because Tom Brady was keeping them off the field for the most part.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 06, 2012, 05:30:11 PM
He doesn't deserve it any less than any other QB that got it, though, and he deserved it more this time than he did last time.


Edit: Well, any other QB that got it as the "default" and not because they, say, threw five or six TDs during the game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 06, 2012, 08:24:03 PM
He doesn't deserve it any less than any other QB that got it, though, and he deserved it more this time than he did last time.


Edit: Well, any other QB that got it as the "default" and not because they, say, threw five or six TDs during the game.

I agree with that. I just think it's a silly award or distinction, is all. He played well, and the team played well. Tom Brady tried hard, his team dropped passes, and their D was for the most part poor.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on February 06, 2012, 08:35:24 PM
Another reason I'm so glad the Patriots lost: Belichick cutting a wide receiver the night before the Super Bowl.  Really? The night before the biggest game in the NFL?  What a dick move.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 06, 2012, 09:07:09 PM
I mean seriously, as if I needed more confirmation that he's a cockbag.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on February 06, 2012, 10:45:00 PM
I have done a complete reversal of opinion on Eli this year.  I'll put him on my top five list of QBs if I were starting a team.  When it really, really counts, this sumbitch is as cool and unphased as a QB can be.  Clutch.

Dude has won two Super Bowls and 2 SB MVP awards (I actually think he deserved both, especially the first).  Both times over Tom Brady and Bill Bellichick.  He is probably going to end up in the Hall of Fame.  Mind blowing.  Yeah, he has his truly bad moments, and I am sure there are plenty of semantical arguments about his numbers.  Doesn't matter any more. 



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Margalis on February 07, 2012, 01:28:58 AM
I think a legitimate argument could be made for the Giants punter as MVP. He basically had the perfect game for a punter.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on February 07, 2012, 01:44:40 AM
He did have a good game, but the only way he could be made MVP would be if one of those punts had knocked Brady unconscious whilst studying photos on the sideline.  Point made, though.

Giants running attack was also really good, IMO.  Moving the chains, eating the clock.  Not a lot of big plays, but just grinding away and keeping Brady on the sidelines.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 07, 2012, 03:02:59 AM
I loved the Giants punter, mostly because he was the most amped up I have ever seen a punter. I mean, if I punted as well as him, I'd be jumping around and screaming like a moron too, mind you, but you usually don't actually SEE that.

I also loved how he looked like someone kicked his puppy when he got a touchback (because one of the other Giants couldn't quiiiiiite bat the ball down at the one).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on February 07, 2012, 08:18:04 AM
I have done a complete reversal of opinion on Eli this year.  I'll put him on my top five list of QBs if I were starting a team.  When it really, really counts, this sumbitch is as cool and unphased as a QB can be.  Clutch.

Dude has won two Super Bowls and 2 SB MVP awards (I actually think he deserved both, especially the first).  Both times over Tom Brady and Bill Bellichick.  He is probably going to end up in the Hall of Fame.  Mind blowing.  Yeah, he has his truly bad moments, and I am sure there are plenty of semantical arguments about his numbers.  Doesn't matter any more. 

I've come to realize that he's really a Brett Favre type. His brother is the analytic, Joe Montana type who can pick apart a defense. Eli has some of that, but his main strength is unflappability and audacity. Though he constantly looks like a 4th grader who's surrounded by the bullies in the bathroom about to dunk his head in the toilet, he somehow finds a way to make a play or throw an INT, just like Favre used to. When he's on and lucky, he can take over a game, and he did just that many times this season. He was one good defensive stop away from beating the Packers in the regular season and did beat them in the playoffs by demolishing their defense. On a team with a better running game, a better O line and a consistent core of uninjured receivers, he will put up gaudy numbers. He had more yards passing this season than Rodgers, 29 TD and 16 INT and averaged over 300 yards a game. Those numbers are actually right in line with some of Favre's better seasons, and are better than many of Favre's worst seasons.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on February 07, 2012, 08:26:50 AM
I've come to realize that he's really a Brett Favre type. His brother is the analytic, Joe Montana type who can pick apart a defense. Eli has some of that, but his main strength is unflappability and audacity. Though he constantly looks like a 4th grader who's surrounded by the bullies in the bathroom about to dunk his head in the toilet, he somehow finds a way to make a play or throw an INT, just like Favre used to. When he's on and lucky, he can take over a game, and he did just that many times this season. He was one good defensive stop away from beating the Packers in the regular season and did beat them in the playoffs by demolishing their defense. On a team with a better running game, a better O line and a consistent core of uninjured receivers, he will put up gaudy numbers. He had more yards passing this season than Rodgers, 29 TD and 16 INT and averaged over 300 yards a game. Those numbers are actually right in line with some of Favre's better seasons, and are better than many of Favre's worst seasons.

I have to agree. However, their moxies are too different to automatically put them in company. Favre conjures images of the old farmboy with a gift for the game, where Eli - well you said it best with the 4th grader image. However, on the field, they are damn similar.

Funny, I really hated Eli when he came into the league because I am of the mentality of you obey the draft, you don't get to pick and choose... that is why it is a fucking draft. Felt a lot like getting picked for a team on the playground and deciding since stupid John is on the team you aren't going to play unless you get on the other team. Whereas I liked Favre from the onset, though his exit left a very bad impression (I still like the guy though).


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Draegan on February 07, 2012, 10:08:55 AM
Did you hate Elway too?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on February 07, 2012, 10:14:10 AM
I did. Also Tony Dorsett.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 07, 2012, 11:53:33 AM
Did you hate Elway too?

Doesn't everyone?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on February 07, 2012, 12:14:28 PM
No. Weenie.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 07, 2012, 12:16:47 PM
(http://tacticalip.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/elway_horseface-300x225.png)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on February 07, 2012, 12:17:40 PM
Heh.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 07, 2012, 12:19:14 PM
How do you hate John Elway?  I can see being indifferent to him, but hate?  That's fucking unamerican, man.   :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on February 07, 2012, 12:20:34 PM
I hated him when he played because he played for the Broncos. My brother liked them, so I had to hate them.

I'm in different to him now.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on February 07, 2012, 12:21:16 PM
Did you hate Elway too?

I believe I have stated many times, I am a Browns fan.

But yes, I thought he was a dick about whining about being drafted too. Of course, my dislike for him transformed after the '86 playoffs into full on contempt and loathing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 07, 2012, 12:22:16 PM
Ghost, allow me to answer your question, with a picture. A picture I will never, ever tire of seeing.

(http://imgs.sfgate.com/c/pictures/1997/11/20/biggame-1982-kevinmoen.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 07, 2012, 12:24:48 PM
Oh fuck.  I forgot he went to stanford.  Nevermind.  I hate his ass too.  Fucking stanford. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 07, 2012, 12:28:50 PM
What's wrong with Stanford?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on February 07, 2012, 12:37:31 PM
:awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 07, 2012, 12:45:28 PM
I hate stanford with the heat of a million burning suns. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 07, 2012, 12:46:41 PM
What's wrong with Stanford?

What's wrong with Georgia Tech?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 07, 2012, 12:47:10 PM
They are annoying nerds and Indians who think they play relevant football?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 07, 2012, 01:03:32 PM
They are annoying nerds and Indians who think they play relevant football?


And that's really goddamned annoying.  I would be fine if the earth split under stanford's campus and swallowed it whole.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 07, 2012, 02:35:57 PM
I also hate John Elway, although I fully admit it is 100% irrational. He was the opposing QB in the very first Superbowl I ever watched, and therefore he was evil incarnate. And I just ... never stopped hating him or his stupid face.


EDIT: Also Stanford's marching band is fucking awful and I hate them.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on February 07, 2012, 03:53:15 PM
"If you wish to be happy for an hour, get intoxicated. If you wish to be happy for three days, get married. If you wish to be happy for eight days, kill your pig and eat it. If you wish to be happy forever, beat Amherst."


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 07, 2012, 06:27:39 PM
I also hate John Elway, although I fully admit it is 100% irrational.

There is no such thing as irrational sports hate.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on February 07, 2012, 07:46:01 PM
The marching band refused to yield? :P


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on February 08, 2012, 09:15:51 AM
That safety lost the Pats the game.  Without it, they could have held for the FG and been fine.  Okay, so their shitty defense didn't help much, but the safety was a killer.

I can tell you who lost the game for the Pats:

(http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v424/mrmrmrj/bucknerpats.jpg)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 08, 2012, 10:53:45 AM
 :awesome_for_real:

EDIT: True story, the baseball glove I had growing up was a Bill Buckner signature edition one. I never was very good at fielding...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on February 08, 2012, 11:07:07 AM
I can tell you who lost the game for the Pats:

Have you ever played football?  That was a tough catch for anyone to make, let alone while wearing a helmet and knowing that a safety would be pounding your head into the ground the second you touch it.  

Blame Brady.  The guy was throwing at defensive lineman's helmets all day long.  


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on February 08, 2012, 01:15:41 PM
I can tell you who lost the game for the Pats:

Have you ever played football?  That was a tough catch for anyone to make, let alone while wearing a helmet and knowing that a safety would be pounding your head into the ground the second you touch it.  

Blame Brady.  The guy was throwing at defensive lineman's helmets all day long.  


I agree that it was not an easy catch at all.  I just wanted the Buckner thing thrown in because IT'S FUNNY!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on February 08, 2012, 01:20:12 PM
This is the pros. If you get two hands on a ball you should catch it, especially if you are Wes Fuckin' Welker.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 08, 2012, 03:41:52 PM
Anyone who catches things as part of their sport feels that way, but in practice, sometimes you're just not going to catch the goddamn thing.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on February 08, 2012, 05:07:02 PM
Brady lost that game, not Welker.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 08, 2012, 05:10:50 PM
Yeah but the jersey is still funny. And I bet Mookie Wilson agrees.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 08, 2012, 05:52:02 PM
Actually, if you have to blame a wide receiver on the Pats team they shouldn't blame Welker.  They should blame Hernandez and the other guy that dropped perfectly thrown balls that could have kept that drive alive. 

The killer though, was the safety, a call that I think was highly questionable.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 08, 2012, 05:54:09 PM
Questionable rule maybe, but the call pretty much fit the rule.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: caladein on February 08, 2012, 06:05:16 PM
The whole idea behind intentional grounding is to make it as bad as taking a sack, and a sack in the end zone... is a safety.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Slayerik on February 08, 2012, 06:13:16 PM
Brady lost that game, not Welker.

All I'm saying is if you are a top receiver in the league, and you decently get two hands on it, you should catch the ball. Especially in clutch time.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on February 08, 2012, 06:18:56 PM
The whole idea behind intentional grounding is to make it as bad as taking a sack, and a sack in the end zone... is a safety.

They need to fucking un-neuter intentional grounding. This "outside the tackles" means you can throw it wherever bullshit needs to go. If it ain't going near any receivers it should be grounding. I am not saying bring back "in the grasp" but my god it is ridiculous what QBs get away with now.

Also, as I have stated before. Fuck the tuck rule.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 08, 2012, 06:53:20 PM
Questionable rule maybe, but the call pretty much fit the rule.

I find it a tough call because of where the ball was thrown.  It wasn't that far from other players and it was in the middle of the damned field. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 08, 2012, 07:04:10 PM
It was like 20 yards from the closest guy!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on February 08, 2012, 07:12:04 PM
It was like 20 yards from the closest guy!

And the two closest guys were wearing white uniforms at that.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 08, 2012, 07:43:00 PM
I don't remember it being that bad.  Maybe it was, but where the ball lands isn't necessarily an indicator of how close it was to being caught. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on February 08, 2012, 07:56:11 PM
I don't remember it being that bad.  Maybe it was, but where the ball lands isn't necessarily an indicator of how close it was to being caught. 

There was NO ONE on the field who could possibly have caught that throw. Pretty sure Belichek was closer standing on the sidelines.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 08, 2012, 07:58:32 PM
I'll try to go back and re-watch it. 

If so, that was a HUGE fuckup by Brady.  That safety cost them the game.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 08, 2012, 08:08:48 PM
The throw was down the middle. The closest receiver was on a curl going the other way, about 20 yards away from the pass. I mean it's like he was throwing to the kickoff spot.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 08, 2012, 08:23:48 PM
ELI'S intentional-grounding-safety versus the Falcons was dumb in a different way, he didn't manage to throw it past the line of scrimmage or something.  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nevermore on February 08, 2012, 09:20:23 PM
Brady lost that game, not Welker.

All I'm saying is if you are a top receiver in the league, and you decently get two hands on it, you should catch the ball. Especially in clutch time.


All I'm saying is if you are a top quarterback in the league, and you decently get the ball off, you should throw it where the receiver can catch it.  Especially in clutch time.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on February 08, 2012, 10:38:37 PM
I thought the Welker drop was mostly understandable (if out of character)...high, twisiting back shoulder catch.  Pretty high degree of difficulty...the throw was just as faulty as the catch.  I thought Hernandez and Branch made much worse drops, and I think both of theirs were on the last drive.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 09, 2012, 06:20:54 AM
Hernandez's drop was the worst by far. In stride, with room, in both hands.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Segoris on February 09, 2012, 07:03:50 AM
I agree Hernandez's drop was huge and on him, I appreciate Welker's drop because this prank (http://offthebench.nbcsports.com/2012/02/07/web-site-dumps-8000-butterfinger-candy-bars-in-downtown-boston-to-mock-wes-welker/) gave me a laugh:




Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 09, 2012, 01:22:10 PM
Payton Manning is still unable to throw to his left (http://tracking.si.com/2012/02/09/report-peyton-manning-still-unable-to-make-most-throws/?sct=hp_t2_a7&eref=sihp).  He should probably just hang it up and retire while he's ahead.  It always pains me to see these guys drag it out 3-5 years past when they should be done.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on February 09, 2012, 01:25:13 PM
I hope he gets picked up as a QB coach by someone.  The knowledge in his brain needs to be tapped.

I wonder if he'll become the Ted Williams of football.  A gift for the game that he lacks the ability to pass along to others. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 09, 2012, 01:32:51 PM
Terrible puns! That's a bad Nebu!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on February 09, 2012, 01:42:32 PM
I can't imagine there are many teams that wouldn't jump at the chance to sign him even if he can't play in 2012 for no other than QB tutelage, with the upside being IF he can play, he's probably a significant upgrade from what they have. He'd just have to come WAY down on his salary demands, maybe have like $1-2 million in guaranteed money with a shitton of performance bonuses. Miami, San Fran, Washington, Arizona, Jacksonville, Minnesota, Seattle, Oakland (never happen if Palmer is still starting), Denver, Chicago, Tennessee (Hasselback is probably done as their starter), St. Louis would all benefit from his presence. The Jets and Baltimore would also benefit, but I think both Sanchez and Flacco would see it as an insult to have this guy come in and try to teach them how to win and possibly be waiting in the wings to take over. We can guarantee he won't show up  in New Orleans, New England, Green Bay, Detroit or the Giants camp, and he won't help running QB's like Freeman in Tampa or Vick in Philly. Dallas probably falls into the Baltimore category - if they bring in Manning, it's to take Romo's job.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on February 09, 2012, 01:45:28 PM
Do you think that having him as a tutor is worth enough to give up the roster spot for an injury replacement?   I could see that being valuable for Cinci, Detroit, and St. Louis as their young QB's have some serious upside potential. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 09, 2012, 02:03:42 PM
There's only a couple viable teams I could see him signing for:

The Jets - Sanchez blows, but the rest of the team is solid, except for that clubhouse cancer WR.
Houston - Schaub has 1 year left, and he's not exactly gangbusters on that squad even with all the talent. A 70% Peyton Manning could win 10 games there.
Chicago - The Bears need a QB who can do something to do along with Forte. They could be a playoff squad with Manning.
San Fran - Smith comes up on Free Agency. How much money will you risk vs. a risk on someone else? That team is otherwise ready to roll.

Peyton wants to be on a team that has a chance to win right now. He could give fuckall about the money if it means going to Miami, Washington, or Arizona where he'll have zero chance at a Super Bowl.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 09, 2012, 02:12:29 PM
Pretty sure there's not a chance that he ends up here, unless Harbaugh gets overruled, and who is going to overrule him after that season?

And we're definitely not 'otherwise ready to roll'. We have like no wide receivers at all.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Tannhauser on February 09, 2012, 02:22:37 PM
Tennessee has already said "No thanks".


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 09, 2012, 03:04:21 PM
I can't imagine there are many teams that wouldn't jump at the chance to sign him even if he can't play in 2012 for no other than QB tutelage, with the upside being IF he can play, he's probably a significant upgrade from what they have. He'd just have to come WAY down on his salary demands, maybe have like $1-2 million in guaranteed money with a shitton of performance bonuses. Miami, San Fran, Washington, Arizona, Jacksonville, Minnesota, Seattle, Oakland (never happen if Palmer is still starting), Denver, Chicago, Tennessee (Hasselback is probably done as their starter), St. Louis would all benefit from his presence. The Jets and Baltimore would also benefit, but I think both Sanchez and Flacco would see it as an insult to have this guy come in and try to teach them how to win and possibly be waiting in the wings to take over. We can guarantee he won't show up  in New Orleans, New England, Green Bay, Detroit or the Giants camp, and he won't help running QB's like Freeman in Tampa or Vick in Philly. Dallas probably falls into the Baltimore category - if they bring in Manning, it's to take Romo's job.

I believe he's already said that he'll be very flexible with the salary structure.  I'm not sure if he'll be flexible with the amount, however.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 09, 2012, 03:07:22 PM
Chicago - The Bears need a QB who can do something to do along with Forte. They could be a playoff squad with Manning.

I haven't been paying a huge amount of attention to Chicago, but do they have an o-line worth a shit yet? If not, I imagine the last thing you want to put behind it is a dude with a manky neck.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on February 09, 2012, 03:07:37 PM
Normally, I'd say you don't give up the roster spot for a tutor. But it's Peyton Fucking Manning. That's not just any old tutor, the motherfucker was pretty much a de facto on field offensive coordinator for the last decade. The shit he could teach would melt most QB's brains.

I forgot about Cincy. He'd be a good fit there, except well, Mike Brown is a tightwad cumbucket, so that'll never happen. Peyton will pretty much have the leverage in any negotiation because if there aren't at least 10 teams he COULD sign for (not would but could), all he's got to do is say "X of GTFO."


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 09, 2012, 03:09:51 PM
I don't think they'd want to reward Dalton for that awesome season by bringing in Peyton and saying 'ok now sit.'


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 09, 2012, 03:12:42 PM
You're making the assumption that he's going to be good at coaching.  Not everyone who plays well teaches well. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 09, 2012, 03:21:10 PM
Pretty sure there's not a chance that he ends up here, unless Harbaugh gets overruled, and who is going to overrule him after that season?

And we're definitely not 'otherwise ready to roll'. We have like no wide receivers at all.

I put almost no stock in wide receivers, good or otherwise. An outstanding QB will create "good receivers" with few exceptions. Give me a good TE set, two passable WRs, and an outstanding QB? Winner, winner.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 09, 2012, 03:24:47 PM
Worked for the Patriots.

Oh wait.  :awesome_for_real:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on February 09, 2012, 03:26:48 PM
I just don't get why they thought two aging has-beens and a glorified slot receiver could be their vertical threats.  Even with Gronk, they don't scare anyone deep.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 09, 2012, 03:44:38 PM
Worked for the Patriots.

Oh wait.  :awesome_for_real:

It got them to the Super Bowl. I'd love to say that for my Cowboys, even if they lost. It worked for the Packers. It worked for Drew Brees. It works all over the board.

The only difference is that the 49ers also have an amazing Defense, which is what those other teams lack.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 09, 2012, 03:54:18 PM
Our WRs are all either injury prone, terrible, or both. I mean really really bad. I expect us to pick at least 2 up in the draft, and go after one of the big name free agent WRs as well.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 09, 2012, 03:57:48 PM
I just don't get why they thought two aging has-beens and a glorified slot receiver could be their vertical threats.  Even with Gronk, they don't scare anyone deep.

They remind me a lot of the Spurs in basketball.  They are able to pound almost everyone in the regular season due to being top notch at planning and execution, but their athleticism, or lack thereof, is starting to show. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on February 09, 2012, 04:16:34 PM
You're making the assumption that he's going to be good at coaching.  Not everyone who plays well teaches well. 

Hence my Ted Williams comment above.  :-P


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 09, 2012, 05:28:33 PM
I'm really not all that familiar with Williams.  I'm not much of a baseball guy.  I would wager, however, that most really good players make shitty coaches. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Cyrrex on February 09, 2012, 10:25:32 PM
I didn't see a lot of Manning-like qualities in Curtis Painter (you'd thinking that something would have at least rubbed off), so at the very least I suspect that he might not be too into teaching someone while he is on the active roster.  He wants to play.  That might make him a bit bitter and petty about such things.

I would like to hear him as an analyst. Get him and Justin Timerberlake to replace Gruden and Jaws on the ESPN cast.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 10, 2012, 06:10:19 AM
Peyton might be a better coach when he's not gunning for the QB job. He has no interest in training his replacement. Neither did Favre.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 10, 2012, 06:22:16 AM
Name some top flight players that have gone on to be coaches.  If there are any, they are likely defensive players or linemen, but even those guys aren't typically heading into coaching.  It doesn't happen in basketball either.  I'm not sure about baseball, but I don't think Whitey Herzog or Tommy LaRussa were all stars.  I know that Francona played and so did Scioscia, but neither one do I remember as a Favre or Manning star type player.  I don't think players of Manning's caliber are built to be coaches.  To be a coach you have to be able to let someone else do what needs to be done, and very competitive, legendary quality players have difficulty letting this happen. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on February 10, 2012, 06:26:11 AM
It also helps if you still need a steady paycheck.  But then, the world of analysis is available provided you can speak as well as Magic Johnson.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bunk on February 10, 2012, 06:56:51 AM
Ok, as a Bears fanboy I need to jump in and defend Cutler a bit here. He had a respectable 85.7 passer rating this year, on a team that had turnstiles on the o-line for the first five games, and whose top wide reciever only had 700 yards.

Yes, Chicago would probably win more games next year with a healthy Manning at the helm, but that can be said for all but maybe four teams in the league. You don't bench a guy in his prime, whose actually been showing improvement, just to plug in a nearly 40 all star for one year, when your team really isn't at the point of making a run for the Superbowl.

Plus, I fully belive that Cutler's biggest problem last year was Mike Martz and his crazy assed eight men in motion playbook.

Not to mention the simple fact that if they are having this much trouble signing their best player currently, how the hell would they find money for Manning?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 10, 2012, 07:05:13 AM
Tom Landry was a 1954 all-pro back, and an amazing coach. He's probably the best example in the NFL.
Don Shula played for 7 years as a DB with 21 picks and 4 fumbles.

In baseball, Joe Torre, Connie Mack, Casey Stengel, Bucky Harris all were great players and hall of fame managers. (Torre's not in yet but will be)


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Nebu on February 10, 2012, 07:10:58 AM
Most great players make terrible coaches.  I agree.  I think that teaching and playing are very different skill sets.  I also think that it can be difficult to understand how someone can't do what you did effortlessly.  Then there's the issue of drive. 


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: 01101010 on February 10, 2012, 07:15:28 AM
Tom Landry was a 1954 all-pro back, and an amazing coach. He's probably the best example in the NFL.
Don Shula played for 7 years as a DB with 21 picks and 4 fumbles.

In baseball, Joe Torre, Connie Mack, Casey Stengel, Bucky Harris all were great players and hall of fame managers. (Torre's not in yet but will be)


Might be too early, but if Jim Harbaugh keeps going the way he has...


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Johny Cee on February 10, 2012, 07:20:49 AM
It also helps if you still need a steady paycheck.  But then, the world of analysis is available provided you can speak as well as Magic Johnson.

Coaching is a shitload of work for a very mediocre paycheck.  Broadcasting is significantly better in pay/work ratio, and even things like memorabilia and speaking gigs are probably competitive with or better paying/less work.  Mickey Mantle supposedly made around $5000/hour signing balls, for instance, and that was decades ago....  and even gigs where you get paid to show up to parties/be seen.  

Basically, for a major star, it's a huge amount of work for a large step down in pay while also shifting more into the background.  


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 10, 2012, 08:43:22 AM
I wouldn't call Harbaugh a HOF type quarterback.  He was no where near the level of Manning or Favre or Jordan or Magic or Bird or McHale.

Joe Torre had a damned good career.  He may be the best I've seen in the modern era.  I, not being a baseball guy, was unaware of how good he actually was.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on February 10, 2012, 09:09:24 AM
You're making the assumption that he's going to be good at coaching.  Not everyone who plays well teaches well. 

I'm making the assumption that the guy who was pretty much calling all the plays on the Colts for the last decade, and most of the time on the fly at the line of scrimmage, can probably tell someone a thing or two about how to play the position. I'm not saying all great players make great coaches, because clearly, that hasn't been the case. I don't think Favre could coach a successful pee wee league team, because what made him special isn't coachable. Peyton to me never had the greatest set of physical skills - wasn't particularly fast or agile, and his arm isn't Favre-fastball level (though his arm strength has never been a question). His main positives were accuracy (teachable), tenacity and the way he was able to read the defenses. All of that is coachable, and someone had to teach him.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 10, 2012, 11:03:35 AM
Yes, he probably can, but again you are making the assumption that he probably will.  Most of these guys are too competitive to do that.  I seriously doubt it will happen.  And as for who taught Payton, it was his father, who had a vested interest in the training of his son.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 10, 2012, 11:18:01 AM
Lenny Wilkens.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bungee on February 10, 2012, 12:07:41 PM
Tom Landry was a 1954 all-pro back, and an amazing coach. He's probably the best example in the NFL.
Don Shula played for 7 years as a DB with 21 picks and 4 fumbles.

In baseball, Joe Torre, Connie Mack, Casey Stengel, Bucky Harris all were great players and hall of fame managers. (Torre's not in yet but will be)


Don't forget Dick LeBeau. He's still in the top 10 in interceptions and is one of the best DCs ever.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Chimpy on February 10, 2012, 01:10:34 PM
The turn of conversation on this page sure seems to fit a pattern.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 10, 2012, 01:33:51 PM
Lenny Wilkens.

I don't know if I would qualify Lenny as a good coach.   :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: WayAbvPar on February 10, 2012, 01:37:21 PM
Lenny Wilkens.

I don't know if I would qualify Lenny as a good coach.   :grin:

Hey look, reason #12132084 for me to ignore anything you have to say!  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 10, 2012, 08:31:01 PM
I figured you guys with green in your name would be better at spotting the sarcasm.... :grin:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Bungee on February 11, 2012, 03:55:59 PM
http://www.nfl.com/videos/nfl-countdowns/09000d5d826cb638/REP-Top-10-plays-of-2011-playoffs?module=HP11_cp

Is there any way this guy will be in a booth next season?  :why_so_serious:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Sjofn on February 11, 2012, 04:40:28 PM
"Other than staring awkwardly off into space, that is what Eli does best" = lololol


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on February 11, 2012, 04:59:59 PM
:heart: Hank Azaria.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on February 13, 2012, 08:07:45 AM
Was that a script or off the cuff?  Brilliant either way.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 15, 2012, 11:37:28 AM
HAEMISH! JAWS GOT DEMOTED SO HE WON'T BE IN THE BOOTH! ZOMG!


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Rasix on February 15, 2012, 11:39:13 AM
That's probably a good change.  He really doesn't add anything anymore. This does mean more Gruden, however.  :oh_i_see:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Paelos on February 15, 2012, 11:41:09 AM
I'm excited about more Gruden.

PS - Think he actually knows more about the game than Jaws and won't fawn over QBs all the time if not given the direct setup by Jaws.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: ghost on February 15, 2012, 12:21:21 PM
Meh.  Neither one bothers me at all, but then again I don't hang off of every word they say when I'm watching.  The best commentators, IMO are the complete idiots, like Madden.  I remember listening to him tell the audience how you need to step on your hat when you're trying to pick it up after it blows off so you don't look stupid when the wind picks it up again and blows it away from your hand.  He went on for 5-10 minutes about this.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on February 15, 2012, 01:11:41 PM
Fuck. More Gruden.

I'd be much happier if they just let the 3 Mikes do the broadcasts - Golic, Greenberg and Ditka.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: shiznitz on February 15, 2012, 01:16:18 PM
They need Hank Azaria.



Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: sickrubik on February 15, 2012, 03:08:10 PM
http://content.usatoday.com/communities/entertainment/post/2012/02/tim-tebow-gets-choked-up-watching-seals/1#.Tzw7m1xSRZ9

Quote
Denver Broncos quarterback Tim Tebow admitted he got a little bit emotional watching the dedication of the U.S. Navy SEALs onscreen at Monday night's premiere of Act of Valor.

"To see what that man did for our country," Tebow said, describing one of the scenes of heroism in the movie that uses active-duty Navy SEALs to depict a fictional story about the country's most elite fighting force. "That was something not talked about or celebrated."

 :facepalm:


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: HaemishM on February 15, 2012, 03:08:59 PM
Don't get me started on that movie. That's a quick trip to Politics.


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Ingmar on February 15, 2012, 03:11:28 PM
So, Tim thinks it was a true story?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: MuffinMan on February 15, 2012, 03:44:59 PM
So, Tim thinks it was a true story?
That's what he's known for doing, no?


Title: Re: NFL 2011
Post by: Trippy on March 14, 2012, 12:31:03 PM
NFL 2012 discussion: http://forums.f13.net/index.php?topic=21972.0