NFL Thread

[FrostyMouse]

No, no, they did not. It looks as if the absence of Sean Payton is more impactful than any of us could've imagined. I didn't have them making the playoffs, but I still had the Saints at 9-7 or 8-8, not potentially 4-12 or 6-10 or something similar. I had thought that Drew Brees alone would be worth a good number of wins, but with the suspensions and the lack of Sean Payton, it would cost them a game or two that they normally would've won here or there, but not an 0-4 start.

---------- Post added at 11:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:39 PM ----------

Is Andy Reid an idiot? Calling a timeout on a 54 yard FG? This "icing the kicker" bs is getting out of hand. There is no reason to even call a timeout there. Tynes missed the FG anyway.

---------- Post added at 11:39 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:38 PM ----------

Tynes' second chance was luckily short for the Eagles, but he was on frame.

[Kaiten]

I missed the Pats big comeback. Blame baseball

Great to see the Ref's back. The game went so much smoother this week. Less extracurricular activity, fewer "kill shots", more timely penalties, more control over the game. Never thought I'd be so excited to see the ref's.

I don't see how you could possibly "know more about football" after listening to Gruden . He's all enthusiasm and not much else. I think he's funny and entertaining, but there isn't much substance there.

He explains the play calling well.

I think you're overly harsh on Aikman, but I don't have to listen to him much so whatever. One who tends to annoy the hell out of me is Dan Dierdorf...man is he awful sometimes.

Dierdorf is awful. There are a lot of bad "B" team color men. The Redskins so rarely air nationally that a lot of those guys called our games. Jim Mora, Jr. was terrible, before returning to coaching.

I don't tend to listen for people to teach me anything, I know the rules and players of the game well enough. I just don't want to find myself disagreeing or being annoyed with what they're saying more than anything.

A good color man should explain the action, especially in football. I want to hear X's and O's, the concepts behind each plays, things I might not know as a layman. Gruden is very good at explaining what is happening on the field, so was Janikowski, and Mike Maycock too. Trent Dilfer is another favorite of mine, whenever he gets to do games.

No, no, they did not. It looks as if the absence of Sean Payton is more impactful than any of us could've imagined. I didn't have them making the playoffs, but I still had the Saints at 9-7 or 8-8, not potentially 4-12 or 6-10 or something similar. I had thought that Drew Brees alone would be worth a good number of wins, but with the suspensions and the lack of Sean Payton, it would cost them a game or two that they normally would've won here or there, but not an 0-4 start.

The head coach is to important to just miss a year, especially one as good as Sean Payton. Drew Brees can't run practice, he can't set the tempo between games, can't consult with the defensive coached. He can't gameplan either. The Saints are also missing Payton's aggression. Payton had a knack for knowing exactly when to step on another team's neck, and exactly when to gamble. Remember the on side kick in the Super Bowl? That was Sean Payton.

Is Andy Reid an idiot? Calling a timeout on a 54 yard FG? This "icing the kicker" bs is getting out of hand. There is no reason to even call a timeout there. Tynes missed the FG anyway.

lol. The NFC East has known about this for years. Reid may be the most overrated coach in football. His time management is horrific. He does this in every close game. Reid can be counted on to call an unnecessary time out, not call one when time is most needed, and to squander the play clock at the last minute. His play calling has always been suspect too. He has one of the best runners in the NFL, LeSean Mccoy, but one of the worst run/pass ratio's. The man hates the running game. That's why despite all the talent Philly has had, they always came up short in the playoffs.

[FrostyMouse]

The one time that I can buy the "icing the kicker bs" (even though stats apparently show that when in similar situations when kickers are iced, they actually end up making the FG 10% more of the time than kickers who aren't iced) is like a 40-45 yard FG. The ones where they call the timeout on a massively long FG are just idiocy and then the guys who call timeouts on the 30 yard ones? Ugh...

Honestly, I never agree with icing the kicker at all because it gives kickers a second chance and usually more time to calm their nerves and get set.

Oh, I completely agree. I don't think Andy Reid's a very good coach at all. He's gotten by on the talent of his players and the "We made it to a SB and four more NFC Championship games" shtick. The fact is that that hasn't been for a while and the whole Michael Vick era and now the "Dream Team" era has not been that good. I agree with the LeSean McCoy issue. This year, the Eagles are magically 3-1 by escaping even though they've given up a huge amount of turnovers, so instead of the 1-3 they probably should have and Andy Reid getting heaps of criticism, there was only some talk about Vick's suitability as a QB long term.

In a way, I compare Eagles fans who think that Andy Reid is a great coach to Cowboys fans who think that Tony Romo is a top QB.

[BASED Shinigami]

^You don't think Romo is a top ten QB? I know he's overrated, but I still consider him somewhat elite. If he would learn to make better decisions in late game situations he would be one of the best in the league. I think that's one of his biggest problems.

---------- Post added at 11:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:09 PM ----------

5 picks!? OK, exclude the top ten statement it's more like top 15 at this point in his career.

[FrostyMouse]

^You don't think Romo is a top ten QB? I know he's overrated, but I still consider him somewhat elite. If he would learn to make better decisions in late game situations he would be one of the best in the league. I think that's one of his biggest problems.

---------- Post added at 11:31 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:09 PM ----------

5 picks!? OK, exclude the top ten statement it's more like top 15 at this point in his career.

Yeah, after watching that game, I don't think anyone can really put Romo up there as an elite QB. :P

I'll give Romo top 15, but top 15 just means that he's better than 15 bums like Brandon Weeden, Ryan Tannehill, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Sam Bradford, Mark Sanchez, and their ilk, and that's not saying all that much.

---------- Post added at 11:48 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:41 PM ----------

Not all of the picks were Romo's fault, admittedly, probably only two of them, as two were just receivers fucking up and then one was a strip sack/fumble/whatever your want to call it, but no matter how it happened, five picks is unconscionable.

---------- Post added October 02, 2012 at 12:22 AM ---------- Previous post was October 01, 2012 at 11:48 PM ----------

Another awesome thing for Romo. He's the only active QB with multiple five pick games. Not even Sanchez has two games with five picks.

[BASED Shinigami]

You think the cowboys can make the playoffs?

[FrostyMouse]

You think the cowboys can make the playoffs?

No. In fact, I never have the Cowboys in the playoffs. At least the annoying ESPN guys (looks at Skip Bayless) have stopped saying the Cowboys will win the SB every year.

Here were my preseason picks for the playoff picture.

AFC

North - Pittsburgh Steelers
South - Houston Texans
East - New England Patriots
West - Oakland Raiders

Wildcard - Baltimore Ravens, Denver Broncos

NFC

North - Green Bay Packers
South - Atlanta Falcons
East - New York Giants
West - SF 49ers

Wildcard - Detroit Lions, Carolina Panthers


I think that the Steelers get past the Ravens this year in the AFC North because the defense took some hits, such as with Suggs' injury. I don't want to give the second wild card to the Broncos, but I can't really see any other team getting it.

I don't believe in Jay Cutler at all, and I think that both the Packers and the Lions are better than the Bears.

As to my NFC South pick, well, I just think that there will be some big problems in Saints land and even with Brees, there are going to be some problems. I think where we'll notice the absence of Sean Payton and Jonathan Vilma will be most apparent in important divisional road games, such as at Atlanta and at Carolina, and possibly at Tampa Bay. Plus, I think that they'll slip a few games in the Super Dome. I know that I'm taking a big risk by giving the second wild card spot to the Panthers, but I liked what I saw out of Cam Newton. He doesn't make bad runs like Vick or anything and he can throw. Plus, the Panthers became better this year, whereas the Saints got worse and the Falcons are always up and down. It'll be close. I could see both the Panthers and the Saints being 9-7 or 10-6, but the Panthers get the second wild card on some tiebreaker. In terms of giving the division to the Falcons, I think that this is Matt Ryan's chance to step up and perform, because he's probably not going to get that many chances with Brees in his division. I'm not a huge believer in Matt Ryan, because I think that his head coach makes bad decisions at times, such as going for it against the Saints last year, and that while he doesn't throw that many picks, they're usually really untimely. I know, the way I described the Falcons isn't as a team that I really believe in, but with the Saints' problems, I'm just going to go with it.

Going by what we've seen so far, it appears that the Ravens may be winning the NFC North again. My pick of the Raiders for the AFC West is looking pretty questionable right now, although we are only through Week 4.

For the NFC, the Lions and the Panthers are not really getting it done, but at least the Falcons appear to be winning the NFC South.

[xi0]

Yeah, after watching that game, I don't think anyone can really put Romo up there as an elite QB. :P

I'll give Romo top 15, but top 15 just means that he's better than 15 bums like Brandon Weeden, Ryan Tannehill, Ryan Fitzpatrick, Sam Bradford, Mark Sanchez, and their ilk, and that's not saying all that much.

Lolwut...I'd take Romo over any of those guys. The only one who I might take over him because of age and potential is Bradford. If his supporting cast got better he could be quite good, plus he's still young.

I'm not sure why you put Weeden and Tannehill in that list since they're both rookies. Neither are as unimpressive as Blaine Gabbert was last year, and even Gabbert looks like he might have improved this season already.

[FrostyMouse]

Lolwut...I'd take Romo over any of those guys. The only one who I might take over him because of age and potential is Bradford. If his supporting cast got better he could be quite good, plus he's still young.

I'm not sure why you put Weeden and Tannehill in that list since they're both rookies. Neither are as unimpressive as Blaine Gabbert was last year, and even Gabbert looks like he might have improved this season already.

Gary, I said that Romo was top 15, which meant that he was better than those bums. Of course I'd take Romo over those guys. I tend to forget Blaine Gabbert exists, honestly, after how poor his rookie season was.

---------- Post added October 04, 2012 at 12:39 AM ---------- Previous post was October 03, 2012 at 03:03 PM ----------

Apparently, it was announced yesterday will be an NFL stadium built basically next to the Staples Center in downtown LA. It's already been named Farmers Field. NFL teams aren't allowed to comment on moves until after the season, but I'd say the Rams are picking up and moving whenever Farmers Field is built.

---------- Post added at 11:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:39 AM ----------

It looks as if the Rams are going to beat the Cardinals, but until that 51 yard passing TD, Sam Bradford was completely awful. He's still been awful today, but the Cards just aren't finishing things out and the better team looks as if they're going to lose.

[xi0]

Making these teams play on a Thursday is hypocritical and an unmitigated joke. They can't even bother making sure they have a bye before the week they play on Thursday.

[Jammin]

Making these teams play on a Thursday is hypocritical and an unmitigated joke. They can't even bother making sure they have a bye before the week they play on Thursday.

All because the NFL wanted to exploit a loophole in their TV contracts so that can put a game on NFL network an still get paid.

I don't know why you guys like Mayock so much either. I mean, I know a lot of color commentators do the whole "This is best ____ in the NFL" but he does it like 15 times a game. Way too much schmoozing for me.

I like Dan Dierdorf, Chris Collinsworth because they seem more willing to point out bad football when they see it. Or when their is a weakness in the formation that can be exploited. That's the kind of stuff I like to hear being talked about. Mayock, and Gruden to a lesser degree, spend too much time droning on about how much they "love the way this guy plays"; I understand the desire to stay positive but they go overboard for me.

-------------------------------------------------

As for the QB discussion. I think it's a pretty big overreaction to jump all over Romo or Bradford.

Football is a team game and when a team plays bad QB's end up looking worse than they are. Romo did not have a good game but his receivers greatly contributed to that and after a certain point he had to take chances because that's the only way the Cowboys had any chance at winning. Bradford lost the best receiver he had early on and really doesn't have anybody else reliable. He misses some throws but there were reasons for that outside his own ability.

Also, referring to Weeden, Tannehill, or Gabbart as "bums" is taking things way too far IMO. Weeden and Tannehill are rookies and I think are showing solid improvement and Gabbart has been a lot better in his second year. Most rookie QBs don't come out of the gate throwing like a pro and these guys are not playing with a set of great players around them. Are they ever going to be elite? I'm not sure, but I think dismissing them is jumping the gun.

After all, Tom Brady was a forth string quarterback on his first season in the NFL and didn't even play particularly well until the 5th game of his second season and he was on a much better football team than any of these guys are.

Fitzpatrick and Sanchez....I'd like to defend but I really can't.

[FrostyMouse]

As for the QB discussion. I think it's a pretty big overreaction to jump all over Romo or Bradford.

Football is a team game and when a team plays bad QB's end up looking worse than they are. Romo did not have a good game but his receivers greatly contributed to that and after a certain point he had to take chances because that's the only way the Cowboys had any chance at winning. Bradford lost the best receiver he had early on and really doesn't have anybody else reliable. He misses some throws but there were reasons for that outside his own ability.

Also, referring to Weeden, Tannehill, or Gabbart as "bums" is taking things way too far IMO. Weeden and Tannehill are rookies and I think are showing solid improvement and Gabbart has been a lot better in his second year. Most rookie QBs don't come out of the gate throwing like a pro and these guys are not playing with a set of great players around them. Are they ever going to be elite? I'm not sure, but I think dismissing them is jumping the gun.

After all, Tom Brady was a forth string quarterback on his first season in the NFL and didn't even play particularly well until the 5th game of his second season and he was on a much better football team than any of these guys are.

Fitzpatrick and Sanchez....I'd like to defend but I really can't.

Romo has looked bad at times, but he's still a decent QB. Bradford's been bad his entire career. I'll give him a pass on the injured season, but otherwise, no...He was 7-21 last night or something.

Weeden, Tannehill, and Gabbart have time to improve, but they're not exactly impressive. Cam's a far better player than those guys, and he didn't have great receivers, but look at his first season.

That's because no one believed in Brady in college and we had a decent/good starting QB in Drew Bledsoe. The Patriots were a top defensive team before we got Brady, that is true. In terms of defensive teams though, last year, when Schaub got injured, the succession of guys that they tried to replace him with didn't work out at all. I know Leinart got injured on his first pass, but the guy after him couldn't do it.

[Jammin]

Romo has looked bad at times, but he's still a decent QB. Bradford's been bad his entire career. I'll give him a pass on the injured season, but otherwise, no...He was 7-21 last night or something.

Weeden, Tannehill, and Gabbart have time to improve, but they're not exactly impressive. Cam's a far better player than those guys, and he didn't have great receivers, but look at his first season.

That's because no one believed in Brady in college and we had a decent/good starting QB in Drew Bledsoe. The Patriots were a top defensive team before we got Brady, that is true. In terms of defensive teams though, last year, when Schaub got injured, the succession of guys that they tried to replace him with didn't work out at all. I know Leinart got injured on his first pass, but the guy after him couldn't do it.

A huge part of what makes a QB look good or bad is if they are able to take pressure off him with the running game, good receivers, or with good pass protection. Brady had some or all of those things in his time as a Patriot and even then he clearly didn't blow Patriots fans away with his ability for quite a while. Bradford never had ANY of those things and in addition he's always been forced to play from behind because his defense can't stop anybody.

For god sake, look at the receivers he was throwing to last night. Danny Amendola is by far the best receiver he's had, and he got injured early. It's hard to throw the ball when nobody gets open, or catch the ball, and your O-line buys you no time. Sam Bradford can't throw it to himself. I'm not sure Bradford is elite but I definitely don't think he's a bad quarterback.

---------------------------------

There is no question that Cam Newton overshot expectations but that doesn't mean you should expect every rookie quarterback to perform like he did, that's just not a reasonable thing to expect.

Some players make the transition from college to pros better than others no question about it. But that doesn't make those that need time to develop to the point were they can play in NFL "bums" that just means their more of a work in progress, some like Tom Brady could become amazing as they get used to the speed of the game and learn to read the defenses better.

Some of these guys may not be good, and some of them might be, my point is that it's too early to really know; and dismissing them seems like a huge overreaction.

[BASED Shinigami]

^Bradford hasn't been bad his entire career. I thought he played the QB position exceptionally well that season he threw for over 3000 yards even though his team still finished with a below 500 record. I thought he did the best could with the personnel around him. The rams have simply not been a good team for the latter half of this past decade, so all the blame cant be placed upon Bradford for his shortcomings.

[kdowns]

Hai Gary

/taunt